“A STUDY ON BRAND PREFERENCE FOR BAJAJ TWO WHEELER’S AMONG CUSTOMERS IN VELLORE”
In the partial fulfillment for the award of
MASTER DEGREE IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
MR. MATHAN RAJ P.K.
REG NO: 22205409010
Under the guidance of
MRS. P. RAJESWARIM.B.A. M.Phil.
OSCAR MANAGEMENT COLLEGE
#A-2, Near Collectorate,
Sathuvachari, Vellore – 9.
OSCAR MANAGEMENT COLLEGE
(Approved by DRAVIDIAN UNIVERSITY)
#A-2, Near Collectorate,
Sathuvachari, Vellore – 9
This is to certify that this project entitled “A STUDY ON BRAND PRFERENCE FOR BAJAJ TWO WHEELER’S AMONG CUSTOMERS IN VELLORE” submitted by MR.MATHAN RAJ.P.K(RegNo: 22205409010) in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of Master of Business Administration from DRAVIDIAN UNIVERSITY, is the original work of the candidate and has not been submitted for awarding any degree of either this university or any other university either in full or in part.
Signature of the Guide
OSCAR MANAGEMENT COLLEGE
(Approved by DRAVIDIAN UNIVERSITY)
#A-2, Near Collectorate,
Sathuvachari, Vellore – 9
This is to certify that this project entitled “A STUDY ON BRAND PRFERENCE FOR BAJAJ TWO WHEELER’S AMONG CUSTOMERS IN VELLORE” submitted by MR.MATHAN RAJ.P.K(Reg No: 22205409010) for viva voce Examination held on ______________ in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of Master of Business Administration from DRAVIDIAN UNIVERSITY.
External Examiner Internal Examiner
OSCAR MANAGEMENT COLLEGE
(Approved by DRAVIDIAN UNIVERSITY)
#A-2, Near Collectorate,
Sathuvachari, Vellore – 9
I, MathanRaj.P.K. hereby declare that the project entitled “A STUDY ON BRAND PRFERENCE FOR BAJAJ TWO WHEELER’S AMONG CUSTOMERS IN VELLORE” submitted to DRAVIDIAN UNIVERSITY in partial fulfillment of the degree in Master of Business Administration is a record of original work done by me. This project work has not previously formed the basis for the award of any degree, diploma, associateship, fellowship or other similar title.
Place: (MATHAN RAJ.P.K.)
Date: Reg No: 22205409010
First and foremost, I thank GOD for the blessings and guidance at all stages in the completion of this project.
I take this opportunity to express my deep sense of gratitude toMr. JAI CHANDRAN, Founder Chairman, of our college for his good wishes for this project. I express my immense gratitude to my Principal Mr. P. PETER for his support and encouragement for thecompletion of my project.
I extend the immense gratitude to the Project Guide Mrs. P. RAJESWARI who provided her guidance and inspiration in doing this project and without her guidance, motivation and support, this project will not be possible. I take immense pleasure in conveying my thanks and deep sense of gratitude to my faculty and my mentor Mrs. IDA SELVARANI, for her exhilarating supervision, timely suggestions, motivation and encouragement during all phases of this project work.
I also thankful to all other faculty members of the department for the constant co-operations and encouragement in pursuing my project work.
I also very much thankful to Mr. SARAVANAN, Sales Manager of Shree Lakshmi Motors, Mr. RAVI, General Manager of Shree Lakshmi Motors and Mr. S. RAJA GURU, General Manager of Aakash Motors, who has provided me with the customer database and lots of information which is helpful for the project.
I specially thank Dr. R. RAVANAN, Associate Professor of Statistics, Presidency College, Chennai for his teaching and guidance in the SPSS Package and in different Statistical tools. Without his guidance it is not easy to complete the data analysis part.
I would like to thank all my friends for their constant encouragement, support and help to make this project a success. I specifically thank to my friends, Mr. R. SARAN RAJ and Mr. S. SIVAPRAKASAM who helped me a lot in the data collection process and Mr. JAISON SAMUEL who helped me in the initial analysis process of this project.
Finally, I would like to convey my gratitude to my loveable parents&relatives whose prayers and blessings were always there with me.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER NO TITLE PAGE NO 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Statement of the Problem 3 1.3 Need for the Study 3 1.4 Objectives of the Study 4 1.5 Scope of the Study 4 1.6 Limitations of the Study 4 1.7 Company Profile 5 2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 2.1 Field of the Study 9 2.2 Research Design 9 2.3 Sample Design 11 2.4 Source of Data 12 2.5 Tool of Data Collection 12 2.6 Data Analysis 13 3 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 3.1 Theoretical Framework 21 3.2 Research Studies 34 4 DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 43-87 5 FINDINGS, SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSION 5.1 Findings 88 5.2 Suggestions 91 5.3 Conclusion 92 Annexure Questionnaire 93 Bibliography 96
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO TABLE NAME PAGE NO 1.1 Key People of Shree Lakshmi Motors 8 1.2 Key People of Aakash Motors 8 2.1 Address of Dealers 9 3.1 Black Box Model 26 4.1 Details of Age Group 43 4.2 Details of Educational Qualification 45 4.3 Occupation Information about the Respondents 47 4.4 Details of Monthly Income 49 4.5 Need for buying the bike 51 4.6 Frequency table for factors affecting the Purchasing Decision 53 4.7 Friedman Test 54 4.8 Personal Source of Information 55 4.9 Commercial Source of Information 57 4.10 Experimental Source of Information 59 4.11 Medium of Communication that influences the Brand Preference 61 4.12 Mode of Purchase 63 4.13 Role in Decision Making 64 4.14 Period took to choose the Bajaj Brand 65 4.15 Frequency table showing the reason for Brand preference 67 4.16 Percentage of Product Features 69 4.17 ANOVA – Total Features 70 4.18 Descriptive Statistics 70 4.19 Percentage of Showroom Attributes 71 4.20 ANOVA – Total Showroom Attributes 72 4.21 Descriptive Statistics 72 4.22 Role of availability in the selection of brand 73 4.23 Trust Level on the Bajaj Brand 74 4.24 Reaction of customer when Bajaj Brand is not available during the purchase 75 4.25 Percentage of Satisfaction on the given attributes 76 4.26 Correlation between Level of Satisfaction of Safety and Comfort 77 4.27 ANOVA – Total Price 78 4.28 Descriptive Statistics 78 4.29 Rating of Overall Service Experience 79 4.30 Overall Satisfaction level with regards to the Bajaj bike 80 4.31 Correlation between Overall Satisfaction and Service Experience 81 4.32 Future Purchase Decision 82 4.33 Level of Promoting the Bajaj Brand 83 4.34 One Sample T-Test for the Level of Promotion at 1% level 84 4.35 Level of Recommendation of dealer to others 85 4.36 Crosstabs between Educational Qualification and Brand Preference Level 86 4.37 T-Test for difference of two mean 87
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO FIGURE NAME PAGE NO 1.1 Organizational Structure of Shree Lakshmi Motors 7 1.2 Organizational Structure of Aakash Motors 8 3.1 Project Study Analysis Process 24 3.2 Buying Decision Process 30 3.3 Steps between Purchase Intention & Purchase Decision 32 4.1 Percentage of respondents based on Age Group 44 4.2 Percentage of respondents based on Education 46 4.3 Percentage of respondents based on Occupation 48 4.4 Percentage of respondents based on Income Level 50 4.5 Percentage of Need for buying the bike 52 4.6 Percentage of Personal Source of Information 56 4.7 Percentage of Commercial Source of Information 58 4.8 Percentage of Experimental Source of Information 60 4.9 Percentage of Influence of Communication Medium 62 4.10 Percentage of Period took to choose the Bajaj Brand 66 4.11 Percentage of Preference Reason 68
Brand Preference is the measure of Brand Loyalty in which a consumer will choose a particular brand in presence of competing brands, but will accept substitutes if that brand is not available. Brand Loyalty refers to the extent of the faithfulness of consumers to a particular brand, expressed through their repeat purchases, irrespective of the marketing pressure generated by the competing brands.
In every product category, consumers have more choices, more information and higher expectations than ever before. To move consumers from trial to preference, brands need to deliver on their value proposition, as well as dislodge someone else from the consumer’s existing preference set.
Preference is a scale, and brands move up, down and even off that scale with and without a vigilant brand management strategy. Pricing, promotional deals and product availability all have tremendous impact on the position of brand in the consumer’s preference set. If all things are equal, the best defense is to make the brand more relevant to consumers than the competition.
The brands potential can only be fulfilled by continually reinforcing its perceived quality, upmarket identity and relevance to the consumer. The same branding activities that drive awareness also drive preference. And, while awareness alone will not sustain preference, it will improve the brand’s potential for building and maintaining preference.
With a great story and a large enough investment, awareness can be attained rather quickly. It takes time, however, and constant revaluation to build brand preference. Aristotle professed, “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence then is not an act, but a habit.” Attaining and sustaining preference is an important step on the road to gaining brand loyalty. The ability to generate more revenue, gain greater market share and beat off the competition is the reward given by consumer toward particular brand.
Brand preference is the Selective demand for a company’s brand rather than a product; the degree to which consumers prefer one brand over another. In an attempt to build brand preference advertising, the advertising must persuade a target audience to consider the advantages of a brand, often by building its reputation as a long-established and trusted name in the industry. If the advertising is successful, the target customer will choose the particular brand over other brands in any category.
The frequency of repeat purchase in case of two wheeler market is very low. So, the measure of Loyalty is not easy. The brand loyalty of the customer can be identified with the help of how they promote the brand to others, i.e. Word of Mouth Communication. Even though competitors are low in the two wheeler’s segment, competition is very high due to the availability of different product categories under different brands.
The Customers preference among these brands also not easy as the product possesses similar features in all the brands. So, the customer satisfaction determines the loyalty. Customer will get satisfied only when their expectations met or exceed. It is an after purchase behavior. To analyze the Brand Preference and Loyalty, it is necessary to study both the consumer’s buying behavior and after purchase behavior.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
The changing customer perception because of the availability of variety of products in two wheeler segment along with the growing number of competitors had a major impact in the preference of a particular brand. The customers’ decision making process also changes as their buying pattern changes.
The players in the two wheeler market in the Vellore are Bajaj, Hero Honda, TVS, Yamaha, Suzuki, Mahindra, BSA, Ultra Motors and Royal Enfield. Each and every company has different varieties of product category in the two wheelers, which gives lot of options for the customers in Vellore. The fast developing technology and the growing economic status of the people in the Vellore city drive their preference decision.
Bajaj held the most of the market share in the two wheeler segment in Vellore after the launch of CT 100 model which gave good mileage and Pulsar which attracted most of the young customers. Later after the launch of TVS Apache, Yamaha FZ, the preference of brand among customers varied a lot with the availability of various options. So, this study was undertaken to analyze the above mentioned issues.
1.3 Need for the Study
1. The first and foremost need for this study is due to the increasing brand variety in the Vellore two wheeler’s market which is eroding the Brand Loyalty of the customers.
2. The increasing media clutter and the changing consumer preferences.
3. The more number of split loyal and shifting loyal customers are available in the market.
4. Brand Loyalty of a customer is influenced by the customer’s perceived value which is the basic belief results in the action. So, to analyze the preference of brand and to find the factors influencing the Brand Preference of the customer in the two-wheeler segment.
1.4 Objectives of the Study
1. To study the perception and buying behavior of customers in two wheelers.
2. To measure the Brand Loyalty of Bajaj.
3. To study the customers view on features of two wheeler’s and the impact of the communication medium.
4. To study the factors that influence decision-making in choosing the brand.
5. To suggest factors to retain the customers.
1.5 Scope of the Study
* The study is only on Brand Preference so the other aspects such as Brand Recognition, Brand Image, Brand Equity and other branding concepts are not covered.
* Brand Loyalty, Perception and Buying Behavior of respondents are also studied in this research.
* This study covered only the area of the Vellore city. So, the information and the conclusion derived from the study are only relevant to this area alone.
1.6 Limitations of the Study
* The duration of the project was one of the primary constraints for the project.
* This study is confined only among the Bajaj customers in the Vellore city.
* It was an academic effort and limited to cost, time and geographical area.
* Numbers of respondents were restricted due to the time factor.
1.7 Company Profile
Bajaj Auto is a major Indianautomobile manufacturer started by a Rajasthani merchant. It is based in Pune, Maharashtra, with plants in Chakan (Pune), Waluj (near Aurangabad) and Pantnagar in Uttaranchal. The oldest plant at Akurdi (Pune) now houses the R&D centre ahead. Bajaj Auto makes and exports motor scooters, motorcycles and the auto rickshaw.
Over the last decade, the company has successfully changed its image from a scooter manufacturer to a two wheeler manufacturer. Its product range encompasses scooterettes, scooters and motorcycles. Its real growth in numbers has come in the last four years after successful introduction of a few models in the motorcycle segment.
The Bajaj Group is amongst the top 10 business houses in India. Its footprint stretches over a wide range of industries, spanning automobiles (two-wheelers and three-wheelers), home appliances, lighting, iron and steel, insurance, travel and finance. The group comprises of 34 companies. The group’s flagship company, Bajaj Auto, is ranked as the world’s fourth largest two- and three- wheeler manufacturer and the Bajaj brand is well-known across several countries in Latin America, Africa, Middle East, South and South East Asia. Founded in 1926, at the height of India’s movement for independence from the British, the group has an illustrious history. Jamnalal Bajaj was the founder of the Bajaj group.
Bajaj Auto came into existence on November 29, 1945 as M/s Bachraj Trading CorporationPrivate Limited. It started off by selling imported two- and three-wheelers in India. In 1959, it obtained license from the Government of India to manufacture two- and three-wheelers and it went public in 1960. In 1970, it rolled out its 100,000th vehicle. In 1977, it managed to produce and sell 100,000 vehicles in a single financial year. In 1985, it started producing at Waluj near Aurangabad. In 1986, it managed to produce and sell 500,000 vehicles in a singlefinancial year. In 1995, it rolled out its ten millionth vehicles and produced and sold 1 million vehicles in a year.
According to the authors of Globality: Competing with Everyone from Everywhere for Everything, Bajaj has grown operations in 50 countries by creating a line of value-for-money bikes targeted to the different preferences of entry-level buyers.
His son, Kamalnayan Bajaj, then 27, took over the reign of business in 1942. Kamalnayan Bajaj not only consolidated the group, but also diversified into various manufacturing activities. The present Chairman of the group, Rahul Bajaj, took charge of the business in 1965. Under his leadership, the turnover of the Bajaj Auto the flagship company has gone up from INR.72 million to INR. 120 billion, its product portfolio has expanded and the brand has found a global market. He is one of India’s most distinguished business leaders and internationally respected for his business acumen and entrepreneurial spirit. The Vice Chairman of Bajaj Auto is Madhur Bajaj.
In early March 2010, Bajaj Auto Ltd. once again demonstrated its commitment to green technology by achieving Bharat Stage-III norm compliance for its range of products-the first company to do so. The Bharat Stage III norms were notified by Government of India on recommendation by Dr. R.A. Mashelkar committee for the control of pollution in the country and are applicable across all states.
Bajaj has made a number of motorcycles, scooters and cars. Motorcycles in current production are the XCD, Platina, Discover, Pulsar and Avenger. Bajaj also produces many motorcycles for other manufacturers, such as the Kawasaki Ninja 250R, Yamaha YZF-R15 (Unsure), and new for 2011, the KTM Duke 125, Cars include the Bajaj ULC ultra-low-cost car.
Low Cost Cars
Bajaj Auto says its $2,500 car, which it is building with Renault and Nissan Motor, will aim at a fuel-efficiency of 30 kilometres per litre (85 mpg-imp; 71 mpg-US) (3.3 L/100 km), or twice an average small car, and carbon dioxide emissions of 100 g/km. The car is scheduled to be launched in 2012. It is a Tata Nano competitor. The Bajaj venture will have an initial capacity of 400,000 units, while Tata expects eventual demand of 1 million Nanos.
Shree Lakshmi Motors
The journey with Bajaj was started from January 2009 after purchasing the Susee Motors Dealership. Previously the dealership in the Katpadi and the surrounding area was taken care by Susee Motors. But, in 2009 Shree Lakshmi Motors bought the dealership with Bajaj for that area. It was started by Mr.Ravi, Sole Proprietor for the company. They are taking care of both the sales and service of Bajaj two wheelers in their area successfully.
This is a separate business unit for the organization which totally has 5 business units. The other business units are unrelated to each other and covering many other sectors, and targeting different market segment in Vellore district. The following are the five businesses which come under this organization.
1. Ravi Electricals
2. Hotel Shree Lakshmi
3. KRR Group Real Estate
4. Ravi Auto Consultancy
5. Shree Lakshmi Motors
Totally 15 employees are working in the company, among which 5 are front office staffs and the remaining 10 are service mechanics.
Fig 1.1: Organizational Structure of Shree Lakshmi Motors
Table 1.1 Key People of Shree Lakshmi Motors
Name Position Mr. Ravi General Manager Mr. Saravanan Managing Director Mr. Naveen Sales Manager Mr. Guru Service Manager
The company joined their hands with Bajaj from July 2009 covering the area of Sainathapuram and Bagayam of Vellore District. The owner of the company Mr. S.RajaGuru began the company with 12 workers and the business is running successfully in that particular area. The yearly turnover of the company is around Rs. 3 crores. This dealer is taking care of both the sales and service of Bajaj two wheelers.
Fig 1.2: Organizational Structure of Aakash Motors
Table 1.2 Key People of Aakash Motors
Name Position Mr. S. RajaGuru General Manager Mr. Saravanan Sales Manager Mr. Ramkumar Service Manager
2.1 Field of the Study
The study was conducted among the customers of two Bajaj dealers in Vellore. They are Shree Lakshmi Motors in Katpadi Road and Aakash Motors in Sainathapuram.
Table 2.1 Address of Dealers
Address of Dealer 1: Address of Dealer 2: Shree Lakshmi Motors
Chittor High Road,
Near Vijay Sales, Katpadi,
Vellore – 632 007. Aakash Motors
No. 83, Arani Road,
Vellore – 632 001.
2.2 Research Design
A Research design is the arrangement of conditions for collection and analysis of data in a manner that aims to combine relevance to the research purpose with economy in procedure. A Research design could be defined as the blue print specifying every stage of action in the course of research. Such a design would indicate whether the course of action planned will minimize the use of resources and maximize the outcome.
Descriptive Research Design
The Research design used in this study was Descriptive Research Design. Descriptive studies come under formal research, where the objectives are clearly established. It is concerned with the research studies with a focus on the portrayal of the characteristics of a group or individual or a situation. The main objective of this type of study is to acquire knowledge. For example, to identify the use of a product to various groups, a research study may be undertaken to question whether the use varies with income, age, sex or any other characteristics of population. Similarly, such studies are used to examine the characteristics of the corporate sector or consumer behavior, etc.
In this approach, a problem is described by the researcher using questionnaire or schedule. This approach enables the researcher to explore new areas of investigation. A researcher develops the hypothesis based on the knowledge about the subject matter of study. When this approach is adopted, the researcher should be intelligent and alert to elicit the information required from the respondents as accurately as possible.
Merits of Descriptive Approach
* This approach helps to test the conclusions and findings arrived at on the basis of laboratory studies. By using this approach, it is possible to substantiate existing theories and conclusions or modifying them.
* Direct contact between the researcher and the respondent is brought about in this approach. This is very significant because, the researcher would be able to understand himself clearly the problem being studied.
* With the possibility of direct contact with the respondent, the researcher is able to elicit all the relevant information and eliminate irrelevant facts.
Limitations of Descriptive Approach
* Unless a researcher is experienced, there is every possibility of this approach being misused. Hurried conclusions and generalizations may be formed based on the inaccurate field data.
* As this approach involves collection of field data, enormous time and efforts are required to plan and execute the field survey.
* This approach also involves incurring heavy cost on data collection.
* Unless the respondents are cooperative, it is not possible to collect data through this approach.
* Since this approach requires considerable time for data collection, by the time the data collection is complete and analysis are undertaken, conclusions arrived at may not have any relevance.
2.3 Sample Design
A Sample Design is a definite plan for obtaining a sample from a give population. It refers to the technique or the procedure the researcher would adopt in selecting items for the sample.
The sampling technique which was used in this research wasSystematic Random Sampling. It is one of the Probability Sampling techniques. Probability Sampling is the sampling technique in which every unit of the population has given equal chance to be included in the study. A Systematic Random Sampling is a technique which contains every ‘i’thelement of the population. The first element is chosen randomly, the rest systematically.
Merits of Systematic Random Sampling
1. It is very convenient and simple to adopt.
2. The time and cost involved are relatively less.
3. With a large population, this method of sampling is easy to use.
4. Random selection of items is ensured, once the sampling interval is determined.
5. Sampling interval is determined scientifically depending upon the size of sample desired.
Limitations of Systematic Random Sampling
1. It is less representative, as once the first item is selected at random, subsequent items are all lying at uniform interval. So, the selected items may lack complete representativeness.
2. This method requires correct understanding of the methodology as otherwise, the sample selected will not be correct.
3. The first item selected should be strictly at random. If there is any bias in this first stage, this will influence the items selected at subsequent stages.
Population: N = 240
Sample Size: n = 120
Sampling Interval: k = N/n
k = 240/120, therefore, k = 2
2.4 Source of Data
Primary data is known as the data collected for the first time through field survey. The important source for the primary data collection is through Questionnaire and other source is through Sales force opinion.
Secondary data refers to the information or facts already collected. Such data are collected with the objective of understanding the past status of any variable. Secondary sources include the following.
> Research Thesis
> Foot notes
2.5 Tool of Data Collection
The primary tool which was used for data collection was Questionnaire. It was a Structured Questionnaire which consists of series of questions related to the objective of the study. In the prepared questionnaire, eighteen closed-end questions with one open-ended question were designed. The questionnaire was prepared with the help of different Scaling Techniques and Measurement Scales.
2.6 Data Analysis
Primary data generated by the study were cleaned to ensure consistency and transcribed in coded form (pre and post-coded) into the computer using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). There are five different Statistical tools are used in this project to analyze the data effectively. It includes the advanced statistical tools also. The Statistical tools used to analyze are mentioned as follows.
1. T-Test for Single Mean
2. T-Test for difference of two mean
3. ANOVA – One Way ANOVA
4. Chi-Square test for independence of attributes
5. Correlation Coefficient
6. Friedman Test
In the analysis, the Ordinal Scale for the questionnaire, ‘Features of the product’, the scale value was set as follows: 1 – 1 point, 2 – 2 points, 3 – 3points, 4 – 4 points and 5 – 5 points. So, the highest mean value is considered while writing the inference for this questionnaire. Other than this, for all other questionnaire which involves the rating scale, the scale value was set least for higher rating and greater for lower rating. For example, Very High – 1, High – 2, Average – 3, Low – 4, Very Low – 5. So, the least mean value is considered while writing inference for the other questionnaires.
T-Test for Single Mean:
The t- test is the most powerful parametric test for calculating the significance of a small sample mean. A one sample t-test has the following null hypothesis:
Where, the Greek letter µ (mu) represents the population mean and c represents its assumed (hypothesized) value. In statistics it is usual to employ Greek letters for population parameters and Roman letters for sample statistics. The t-test is the small sample analog of the z test which is suitable for large samples. A small sample is generally regarded as one of size n<30.
A t-test is necessary for small samples because their distributions are not normal. If the sample is large (n>=30) then statistical theory says that the sample mean is normally distributed and a z test for a single mean can be used. This is a result of a famous statistical theorem, the Central limit theorem.
A t-test, however, can still be applied to larger samples and as the sample size n grows larger and larger, the results of a t-test and z-test become closer and closer. In the limit, with infinite degrees of freedom, the results of t and z tests become identical.
In order to perform a t-test, one first has to calculate the “degrees of freedom.” This quantity takes into account the sample size and the number of parameters that are being estimated. Here, the population parameter, mu is being estimated by the sample statistic x-bar, the mean of the sample data. For a t-test the degrees of freedom of the single mean is n-1. This is because only one population parameter (the population mean) is being estimated by a sample statistic (the sample mean).
Formula for calculating the t value:
T-Test for difference of two mean:
The Independent Samples T Test compares the mean scores of two groups on a given variable. One of the frequently used t-test is a two sample location test of the null hypothesis that the means of two normally distributed populations are equal. All such tests are usually called Student’s t-tests, though strictly speaking that name should only be used if the variances of the two populations are also assumed to be equal; the form of the test used when this assumption is dropped is sometimes called Welch’s t-test. These tests are often referred to as “unpaired” or “independent samples” t-tests, as they are typically applied when the statistical units underlying the two samples being compared are non-overlapping.
Independent two-sample t-test for Unequal sample size and equal variance
This test is used only when it can be assumed that the two distributions have the same variance. The t statistic to test whether the means are different can be calculated as follows:
Note that the formulae above are generalizations for the case where both samples have equal sizes (substitute n1 and n2 for n).
is an estimator of the common standard deviation of the two samples: it is defined in this way so that its square is an unbiased estimator of the common variance whether or not the population means are the same. In these formulae, n = number of participants, 1 = group one, 2 = group two. n – 1 is the number of degrees of freedom for either group, and the total sample size minus two (that is, n1 + n2 – 2) is the total number of degrees of freedom, which is used in significance testing.
In statistics, one-way analysis of variance (abbreviated one-way ANOVA) is a technique used to compare means of two or more samples (using the F distribution). This technique can be used only for numerical data.
The ANOVA tests the null hypothesis that samples in two or more groups are drawn from the same population. To do this, two estimates are made of the population variance. These estimates rely on various assumptions. The ANOVA produces an F statistic, the ratio of the variance calculated among the means to the variance within the samples. If the group means are drawn from the same population, the variance between the group means should be lower than the variance of the samples, following central limit theorem. A higher ratio therefore implies that the samples were drawn from different populations.
The degrees of freedom for the numerator isI-1, where I is the number of groups (means). The degrees of freedom for the denominator is N – I, where N is the total of all the sample sizes.
Typically, however, the one-way ANOVA is used to test for differences among at least two groups, since the two-group case can also be covered by a t-test (Gosset, 1908). When there are only two means to compare, the t-test and the F-test are equivalent; the relation between ANOVA and t is given by F = t2.
The grand mean of a set of samples is the total of all the data values divided by the total sample size. This requires that you have all of the sample data available to you, which is usually the case, but not always. It turns out that all that is necessary to find perform a one-way analysis of variance are the number of samples, the sample means, the sample variances, and the sample sizes. Another way to find the grand mean is to find the weighted average of the sample means. The weight applied is the sample size.
The total variation (not variance) is comprised the sum of the squares of the differences of each mean with the grand mean.
There is the between group variation and the within group variation. The whole idea behind the analysis of variance is to compare the ratio of between group variance to within group variance. If the variance caused by the interaction between the samples is much larger when compared to the variance that appears within each group, then it is because the means aren’t the same.
Between Group Variation
The variation due to the interaction between the samples is denoted SS(B) for Sum of Squares Between groups. If the sample means are close to each other (and therefore the Grand Mean) this will be small. There are k samples involved with one data value for each sample (the sample mean), so there are k-1 degrees of freedom.
The variance due to the interaction between the samples is denoted MS(B) for Mean Square Between groups. This is the between group variation divided by its degrees of freedom. It is also denoted by .
Within Group Variation
The variation due to differences within individual samples, denoted SS(W) for Sum of Squares Within groups. Each sample is considered independently, no interaction between samples is involved. The degrees of freedom is equal to the sum of the individual degrees of freedom for each sample. Since each sample has degrees of freedom equal to one less than their sample sizes, and there are k samples, the total degrees of freedom is k less than the total sample size: df = N – k.
The variance due to the differences within individual samples is denoted MS(W) for Mean Square Within groups. This is the within group variation divided by its degrees of freedom. It is also denoted by . It is the weighted average of the variances (weighted with the degrees of freedom).
F test statistic
Recall that a F variable is the ratio of two independent chi-square variables divided by their respective degrees of freedom. Also recall that the F test statistic is the ratio of two sample variances, well, it turns out that’s exactly what we have here. The F test statistic is found by dividing the between group variance by the within group variance. The degrees of freedom for the numerator are the degrees of freedom for the between group (k-1) and the degrees of freedom for the denominator are the degrees of freedom for the within group (N-k).
Chi-Square Test for Independence of Attributes:
The test is applied when you have two categorical variables from a single population. It is used to determine whether there is a significant association between the two variables. Suppose N observations are considered and classified according two characteristics say A and B. We may be interested to test whether the two characteristics are independent. In such a case, we can use Chi square test for independence of two attributes.
It has to be noted that the Chi square goodness of fit test and test for independence of attributes depend only on the set of observed and expected frequencies and degrees of freedom. These two tests do not need any assumption regarding distribution of the parent population from which the samples are taken.
Since these tests do not involve any population parameters or characteristics, they are also termed as non-parametric or distribution free tests. An additional important fact on these two tests is they are sample size independent and can be used for any sample size as long as the assumption on minimum expected cell frequency is met.
* Degrees of freedom: The degrees of freedom (DF) is equal to: DF = (r – 1) * (c – 1)
where r is the number of levels for one categorical variable, and c is the number of levels for the other categorical variable.
* Expected frequencies: The expected frequency counts are computed separately for each level of one categorical variable at each level of the other categorical variable. Compute r * c expected frequencies, according to the following formula.
Er,c = (nr * nc) / n
where Er,c is the expected frequency count for level r of Variable A and level c of Variable B, nr is the total number of sample observations at level r of Variable A, nc is the total number of sample observations at level c of Variable B, and n is the total sample size.
* Test statistic: The test statistic is a chi-square random variable (?2) defined by the following equation.
?2 = S [ (Or,c – Er,c)2 / Er,c ]
where Or,c is the observed frequency count at level r of Variable A and level c of Variable B, and Er,c is the expected frequency count at level r of Variable A and level c of Variable B.
P-value: The P-value is the probability of observing a sample statistic as extreme as the test statistic. Since the test statistic is a chi-square, use the Chi-Square Distribution Calculator to assess the probability associated with the test statistic. Use the degrees of freedom computed above.
Correlation is one of the statistical tools very widely applied as a tool of analysis in every subject. It is a statistical measure of establishing qualitative relationship between two or more variables. Through correlation, it is possible to indicate the direction of relationship between variables. In research, whenever qualitative variables are used, their relationship is studied through correlation. Correlation is measured applying different methods in statistics. They are, Graphical method, Scatter diagram method, Karl Pearson’s coefficient of correlation and Spearman’s Rank correlation. A very important point to note is that correlation value for any set of values should not exceed +1 or -1.
The formula for Pearson’s correlation takes on many forms. A commonly used formula is shown below.
A simpler looking formula can be used if the numbers are converted into z scores:
wherezx is the variable X converted into z scores and zy is the variable Y converted into z scores.
The Friedman test is a non-parametric test for testing the difference between several related samples. The Friedman test is an alternative for repeated measures analysis of variances which is used when the same parameter has been measured under different conditions on the same subjects.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
3.1 Theoretical Framework
Brand and branding defined
It is widely acknowledged amongst both practitioners and academics that branding has become a tool of strategic importance. Various definitions of branding appear in literature.
The American Marketing Association (1994) defines a brand as a “name, term, sign, symbol or design, or a combination of them intended to encourage prospective customers to differentiate a producer’s product (s) from those of competitors”.
A primary function of the brand is to provide convenience and clarity in decision making by providing a guarantee of performance and communicating a set of expectations thereby offering certainty and facilitating the buying process. On the emotional side, the function of a brand is to evoke a set of associations and furthermore symbolize the consumer’s persona through brand imagery.
However, this and other definitions of a brand fail to capture the essence of what branding involves or achieves (Marketing in a Global Economy Proceedings, 2000). In order to be successful, images and symbols must relate to and indeed exploit the needs, values and lifestyles of consumers in such a way that the meanings involved give added values, and differentiate the brand from other brands (Broadbent and Cooper, 1987).
In its totality, a brand can be described as a “trademark that communicates a promise (Phillips, 1988). This promise involves a set of symbolic and functional attributes that the market place associates with the brand. Symbolic attributes are those that fulfill internally generated needs for self-enhancement, role position, group membership or ego identification (Park et al., 1996) whereas functional brand attributes solve an externally generated consumption related problem.
Ambler and Styles (1996) describe two different views of defining a brand. The first is the product plus view, when the brand is seen as an addition to the product, and in this view a brand is also called an identifier. The second is the holistic view that communicates the focus on the brand itself that is considered to be much more than just the product. The brand is said to be the sum total of all elements of the marketing mix. Brands can also be explained based on their elements-“those trademarkable devices that serve to identify and differentiate the brand (ego, brand names, logos, symbols, characters, slogans, jingles and packages (Keller, 2002).
DeChernatony and MacDonald (1998) in an attempt to emphasize the increased value that accrues to the consumer by buying the established brand rather than a generic or commodity product, offer the following definition of a brand: “A successful brand is an identifiable product, service, person or place, augmented in such a way that the buyer or user perceives relevant, unique added values which match their needs most closely. Furthermore, its success results from being able to sustain those added values in the face of competition”.
Some people distinguish the psychological aspect of a brand from the experiential aspect. The experiential aspect consists of the sum of all points of contact with the brand and is known as the brand experience. The psychological aspect, sometimes referred to as the brand image, is a symbolic construct created within the minds of people and consists of all the information and expectations associated with a product or service.
People engaged in branding seek to develop or align the expectations behind the brand experience, creating the impression that a brand associated with a product or service has certain qualities or characteristics that make it special or unique. A brand is therefore one of the most valuable elements in an advertising theme, as it demonstrates what the brand owner is able to offer in the marketplace. The art of creating and maintaining a brand is called brand management whereas orientation of the whole organization towards its brand is called brand orientation.
Careful brand management seeks to make the product or services relevant to the target audience. Brands should be seen as more than the difference between the actual cost of a product and its selling price – they represent the sum of all valuable qualities of a product to the consumer. There are many intangibles involved in business, intangibles left wholly from the income statement and balance sheet which determine how a business is perceived. The learned skill of a knowledge worker, the type of mental working, the type of stitch: all may be without an ‘accounting cost’ but for those who truly know the product, for it is these people the company should wish to find and keep, the difference is incomparable. A brand which is widely known in the marketplace acquires brand recognition. When brand recognition builds up to a point where a brand enjoys a critical mass of positive sentiment in the marketplace, it is said to have achieved brand franchise.
One goal in brand recognition is the identification of a brand without the name of the company present. Consumers may look on branding as an important value added aspect of products or services, as it often serves to denote a certain attractive quality or characteristic (see also brand promise). From the perspective of brand owners, branded products or services also command higher prices. Where two products resemble each other, but one of the products has no associated branding (such as a generic, store-branded product), people may often select the more expensive branded product on the basis of the quality of the brand or the reputation of the brand owner.
Brand awareness refers to customers’ ability to recall and recognize the brand under different conditions and link to the brand name, logo, jingles and so on to certain associations in memory. It helps the customers to understand to which product or service category the particular brand belongs to and what products and services are sold under the brand name. It also ensures that customers know which of their needs are satisfied by the brand through its products. (Keller) ‘Brand love’, or love of a brand, is an emerging term encompassing the perceived value of the brand image. Brand love levels are measured through social media posts about a brand, or tweets of a brand on sites such as Twitter. Becoming a Facebook fan of a particular brand is also a measurement of the level of ‘brand love’.
Brand Preference is the measure of Brand Loyalty in which a consumer will choose a particular brand in presence of competing brands, but will accept substitutes if that brand is not available. Brand Loyalty refers to the extent of the faithfulness of consumers to a particular brand, expressed through their repeat purchases, irrespective of the marketing pressure generated by the competing brands.
Fig 3.1: Project Study Analysis Process
Consumer Buying Behavior
Consumer behavior as a body of knowledge emphasizes on the study of both physical activities and decision-making processes that occur in the process of search, evaluation, acquiring, use and disposal of products. Consumer behavior encompasses vast areas of human activities that have direct interface with technology. Borrowing heavily from diverse sweep and come in handy to adapt technology to everyday needs of society. Backed by abundant wealth of information on areas such as consumers’ tastes, shopping habits, store patronage and life style, it has become possible for many marketing research firms to come up with reliably accurate work on many aspects of marketing including product demand forecast, perception of brand image, brand preference, brand loyalty and brand equity position. This approach to problems in marketing management seems to have been well established and therefore, is the popular means adopted in the area of consumer product whether it is physical product or services.
Consumer behavior is the study of when, why, how, and where people do or do not buy a product. It blends elements from psychology, sociology, socialanthropology and economics. It attempts to understand the buyer decision making process, both individually and in groups. It studies characteristics of individual consumers such as demographics and behavioral variables in an attempt to understand people’s wants. It also tries to assess influences on the consumer from groups such as family, friends, reference groups, and society in general.
Customer behaviour study is based on consumer buying behavior, with the customer playing the three distinct roles of user, payer and buyer. Relationship marketing is an influential asset for customer behaviour analysis as it has a keen interest in the re-discovery of the true meaning of marketing through the re-affirmation of the importance of the customer or buyer. A greater importance is also placed on consumer retention, customer relationship management, personalisation, customisation and one-to-one marketing. Social functions can be categorized into social choice and welfare functions.
Each method for vote counting is assumed as social function but if Arrow’s possibility theorem is used for a social function, social welfare function is achieved. Some specifications of the social functions are decisiveness, neutrality, anonymity, monotonicity, unanimity, homogeneity and weak and strong Pareto optimality. No social choice function meets these requirements in an ordinal scale simultaneously. The most important characteristic of a social function is identification of the interactive effect of alternatives and creating a logical relation with the ranks. Marketing provides services in order to satisfy customers. With that in mind, the productive system is considered from its beginning at the production level, to the end of the cycle, the consumer (Kioumarsi et al., 2009).
Factors influencing Consumer Behavior
The starting point for understanding consumer buying behavior is the stimulus – response model. It is generally known as Black Box Model. As this model shows, both marketing and environmental stimuli enter the buyer’s consciousness. In turn, the buyer’s characteristics and decision process lead to certain purchase decisions. The marketer’s task is to understand what happens in the buyer’s consciousness between the arrival of outside stimuli and the buyer’s purchase decisions. This model indicates, a consumer’s buying behavior is influenced by cultural, social, personal, and psychological factors. Knowledge of such factors that influence consumer behavior can help to predict how consumers will respond to their products.
Table 3.1: Black box model
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS BUYER’S BLACK BOX BUYER’S RESPONSE Marketing Stimuli Environmental Stimuli Buyer Characteristics Decision Process Product
Knowledge Problem recognition
Post-purchase behavior Product choice
Purchase amount The black box model shows the interaction of stimuli, consumer characteristics, and decision process and consumer responses.It can be distinguished between interpersonal stimuli (between people) or intrapersonal stimuli (within people). The black box model is related to the black box theory of behaviorism, where the focus is not set on the processes inside a consumer, but the relation between the stimuli and the response of the consumer. The marketing stimuli are planned and processed by the companies, whereas the environmental stimulus is given by social factors, based on the economical, political and cultural circumstances of a society. The buyer’s black box contains the buyer characteristics and the decision process, which determines the buyer’s response.
The black box model considers the buyers response as a result of a conscious, rational decision process, in which it is assumed that the buyer has recognized the problem. However, in reality many decisions are not made in awareness of a determined problem by the consumer.
Culture encompasses the values, arts, customs and skills of people in a given society. Cultural trends reflect the social values of the population and, as such, have important implications for market segmentation, product development, advertising and other aspects of marketing strategy. Social class categories can be identified by income, education level and occupation. The relationship between social class and purchasing patterns, nevertheless, provides an important link for marketers in strategy planning.
Culture includes the basic values, perceptions, preferences, and behaviors that a person learns from family and other key institutions. Subcultures are “cultures within cultures” that have distinct values and lifestyles. People with different cultural, subcultural and social class characteristics have different products and brand preferences.
Social factors also influence a buyer’s behavior. A person’s reference groups such as, family, friends, social organizations, professional associations strongly affect product and brand choices. The person’s position within each group can be defined in terms of role and status. A buyer chooses products and brands that reflect his or her role and status.
The buyer’s age, life-cycle stage, occupation, economic circumstances, lifestyle, personality and other personal characteristic influence his or her buying decisions. Young consumers have different needs and wants from those who are old; consumers with higher incomes buy differently from those who have less to spend. Consumer lifestyles have also an important influence on buyer’s choices.
TYPES OF BUYING BEHAVIOR
The following are the several types of buying behavior that resides with everyone.
Dissonance-Reducing Buying Behavior
It occurs when consumers are highly involved with an expensive, infrequent, or risky purchase, but see little difference among brands. For example, consumers buying carpets may face a high-involvement decision because carpet is expensive and self-expressive. In this case, because perceived differences are not large, buyers may shop around to learn what is available, but buy relatively quickly. They may respond primarily to a good price or to a purchase convenience. After the purchase, consumers might experience post-purchase dissonance (after-sale discomfort) when they notice certain disadvantages of the purchased carpet brand or hear favorable things about brands not purchased. To counter such dissonance, the marketer’s after-sale communications should provide evidence and support to help consumers feel good about their brand choices.
Habitual Buying Behavior
It occurs under conditions of low consumer involvement and little significant brand difference. For example, take salt. Consumers have little involvement in this product category; they simply go to the store and reach for a brand. If they keep reaching for the same brand, it is out of habit rather than strong brand loyalty. Consumers appear to have low involvement with most low-cost, frequently-purchase products. Because they are not highly involved with the product, consumers may not evaluate choice after purchase. Thus, the buying process involves brand beliefs formed by passive learning, followed by purchase behavior, which may not evaluate the choice even after purchase behavior, which may or may not be followed by evaluation. As buyers are not highly committed to any brand, marketers of low involvement products with few brand differences often use price and sales promotions to stimulate product trail.
Variety Seeking Buyer Behavior
Consumers undertake variety-seeking buying behavior in situations characterized by low consumer involvement, but significant perceived brand differences. In such cases, consumers often do a lot of brand switching. For example, when purchasing cookies, a consumer may hold some beliefs, choose a cookie brand without much evaluation, then evaluate that brand during consumption. But the next time, the consumer might pick another brand out of boredom or simply to try something different. Brand switching occurs for the sake of variety rather than because of dissatisfaction. The market leader will try avoiding out-of-stock conditions, and running frequent reminder advertising. Challenger firms will encourage variety seeking by offering lower prices, deals, coupons, free samples and advertising that presents reasons for trying something new.
Impulse and Planned Buying
The purchase of an ice cream may be planned or made on impulse. In some cases, a purchase may be planned in advance, but the timing of the actual purchase may be decided on the impulse of the moment. Impulse buying is sometimes classified into reminder buying or suggestion buying. National advertisers try through displays in retail stores to remind the buyer of products he has seen advertised. Toothpaste is an example.
Suggestion buying occurs when the consumer’s sees a product displayed and realizes that he could use it. An example would be a cigarette lighter. Impulse buying has grown particularly with the development of the self-service retail store.
Consumer buying behavior is influenced by the buyer’s decision making process. The buying situation can vary from one of routine-response behaviors to limited problem solving to extensive problem solving. Buying is not a single act but a multi-component decision on the need class, generic class, product class, product form, brand, vendor, quantity, timing and method of payment. The buyer goes through a process consisting of need arousal, information search, evaluation behavior, purchase decision and post-purchase feelings. At each decision stage, characteristics of the buyer, product, seller and selling situation interact to influence the buying outcome. A person’s buying behavior is the result of the complex interplay of all these cultural, social, personal, and psychological factors. More complex decision usually involve more buying participants and more buyer deliberation. Consumers undertake complex buying behavior when they are highly involved in a purchase and perceive significant differences among brands. Marketers of high-involvement products must understand the information gathering and evaluation behavior of high-involvement consumers.
Fig 3.2: Buying Decision Process
The buyer senses a difference between his or her actual state and some desired state. The need can be triggered by internal stimuli when one of the person’s normal needs – hunger, thirst, sex, etc. rise to a high enough to become a drive. From previous experience, the person has learned how to cope with this drive and is motivated toward objects that he or she knows will satisfy it.
The consumer can obtain information from any of several sources. These include: personal sources (family, friends, neighbors, and acquaintances), commercial sources (advertising, salespeople, dealers, packaging and displays), public sources (mass media, consumer-rating organizations) and experimental sources (handling, examining and using the product).
The relative influence of these information sources varies with the product and the buyer. The most effective sources, however, tend to be personal. Personal sources appear to be even more important in influencing the purchase of services. Commercial sources normally inform the buyer, but personal sources legitimize or evaluate products for the buyer. The marketer should carefully identify consumer’s sources of information and the importance of each source.
Consumers should be asked how they first heard about the brand, what information they received, and the information is critical in preparing effective communication strategies aimed at target markets. Word-of-mouth communication can have a significant impact on purchase decisions. The search for information usually leads to the establishment of criteria for choosing among specific brands. Consumers are usually aware of some brands and unaware of others. Those they are aware of fall into an inert set, an inept set or an evoked set. The final choice will be made from the latter. The costs involved in searching for information, sometimes outweigh the benefits.
Evaluation of Alternatives
The marketer needs to know about the alternative evaluation, that is, how the consumer processes information to arrive at brand choices. Each consumer is trying to satisfy some need and is looking for certain benefits that can be acquired by buying product or service. Further, each consumer sees a product as a bundle of attributes with varying capacities for delivering these benefits and satisfying the need. Marketers should be more concerned with attribute importance than attribute salience.
The consumer’s beliefs held about a particular attribute are based on his or her experience and the effect of selective perception, selective distortion and selective retention. The utility function shows how the consumer expects total product satisfaction to vary with different levels of different attributes.
Purchase decisions often begin with trial purchases of limited quantities. Repeat purchases are closely related to brand loyalty. Store choice is an important factor in purchase decisions. The bulk of consumer spending occurs in stores, but catalog sales comprise an increasing percentage of retail sales. The purchase decision includes decisions on financing, installation, related products and services. The marketing implications of purchase decisions depend on whether a mass-marketing approach or market-segmentation approach is adopted. Generally, the consumer’s purchase decision will be to buy the most preferred brand, but two factors can come between the purchase intention and the purchase decision. They are attitudes of others and unexpected situational factors.
Fig 3.3: Steps between Purchase Intention & Purchase Decision
A consumer’s decision to change, postpone, or avoid a purchase decision is influenced heavily by perceived risk. Many purchases involve some risk taking. Anxiety results when consumers cannot be certain about the purchase outcome. The amount of perceived risk varies with the amount of money at stake, the amount of purchase uncertainty, and the amount of consumer self-confidence. A consumer takes certain actions to reduce risk, such as avoiding purchasing decisions, gathering more information, and looking for national brand names and products with warranties. The marketer must understand the factors that provoke feelings of risk in consumers and must provide information and support that will reduce the perceived risk.
In the post-purchase evaluation, consumers compare the product’s performance against their expectations. Cognitive dissonance occurs when consumers feel a discrepancy between their expectations of a product and its performance. Follow-up advertising can be designed to reassure consumers that they have made the right choice. Consumers base their expectations on messages they receive from sellers, friends and other information sources. If the seller exaggerates the product’s performance, consumer expectations will not be met, a situation that leads to dissatisfaction. The larger the gap between expectations and performance, the greater is the consumer’s dissatisfaction. On the other hand, every purchase involves compromise. Consumers feel uneasy about acquiring the drawbacks of the chosen brand and about losing the benefits of the brands not purchased. Thus, consumers feel at least some post-purchase dissonance for every purchase. A satisfied customer buys again, talks favorably to others about the product, pays less attention to competing brands and advertising and buys other products from the company.
3.2 Research Studies
NiedrichRonald W.and Swain Scott D (2003), in their article titled, “The Influence of Pioneer Status and Experience Order on Consumer Brand Preference: A Mediated-Effects Model” found: Within the behavioral literature, two basic explanations of the pioneering advantage had been offered. Early work focused on order-based explanations. More recently, schema-based explanations had also been suggested. The authors proposed a mediated-effects model of the pioneering advantage and test the model in two separate longitudinal studies. Both experiments support the proposed model. The authors found that experience order and pioneer-status have additive effects on brand preference such that perceptions of first-in-market and first-experienced brands are more favorable, suggesting that both explanations are operative. The authors also provide evidence that the effects of pioneer status on brand preference are mediated by attitude toward the brand and company credibility, while the effects of experience order on brand preference are mediated by attitude toward the brand and attribute recall. These data support the notion that the effect of pioneer status on brand preference was the result of both brand-level and company-level associations.
Dr. Rajagopal (2009), in his article titled, “Conational Drivers Influencing Brand Preference Among Consumers” discussed: Consumers recognize brands by building favorable attitude towards them and through the purchase decision process. Brand preference is understood as a measure of brand loyalty in which a consumer exercises his decision to choose a particular brand in presence of competing brands. The study aimed at discussing the cognitive factors that determine brand preference among consumers based on empirical research. Brand attributes including emotions, attitudes, personality, image, reputation and trust which influence consumer perceptions and temporal association with brands are critically examined in the study. The study revealed that higher brand relevance and trust build strong the association of consumers with brand in long-run.
Purohit?H.C (2008), in his article titled, “Customer Relationship Management and Brand Loyalty Through Word Of Mouth (WOM) Communication” discussed: Customer loyalty is not a choice any longer with business; it is the only way of building a sustainable competitive advantage. Building loyalty with key customers had become a core marketing objective shared by key players in all industries catering to business customers. Communication with customer partners is a necessary process of relationship marketing. It helps in relationship development, foresters trust, and provides the information and knowledge needed to undertake cooperative and collaborative activities of relationship marketing. CRM refers to a conceptually broad phenomenon of business activity; if the phenomenon of cooperation and collaboration with customers become the dominant paradigm of marketing practice the satisfaction level of the consumers goes high up to the level of delight. The building of customer relationship was a fundamental business of every enterprise and it requires a holistic strategy and process to make it successful. The proposed study will focus on the issues related with customer satisfaction, repeat purchase behavior, building consumer relationship management through customer loyalty and suggest the measures to minimize the challenges of a highly competitive global market.
Sha Yang, Gerg M. Allenby and Geraldine Fennel (2002), in their article titled, “Modeling Variation in Brand Preference: The Roles of Objective Environment and Motivating Conditions” discussed: People consume products in a variety of environments. They drinkbeer, for example, by themselves, with close friends, on thebeach, when playing cards, at tailgate parties, and while havingdinner with their boss. Within these environments, an individualmay prefer Schaefer beer when drinking alone, Budweiser whenhaving a party, Corona when lying on the beach, and Heinekenwhen dining out. Preferences change across environments becausethe benefits sought by the consumer change. Consumers may feelthirsty while lying on the beach, and they may want to displayrefined tastes while dining out. Moreover, the effect of environmentmay not be homogeneous, as some people enjoy meeting new peoplein social gatherings while others may prefer to visit with thosewho are more familiar. Even though consumers face the same objectiveenvironment, different motivating conditions and brand preferencesmay arise.
It is important for marketing managers to understand how brandpreferences change across people, environments, and motivatingconditions and, more importantly, which product attributes areassociated with these changes. Communication and positioningdecisions are more likely to be effective if the relationshipsamong objective environment, motivating conditions, and preferencesfor brand attributes are known. If motivating conditions areuniquely associated with individuals across environments orwith environments across individuals, then the basis of marketinganalysis is at the individual or environmental level. If, however,motivating conditions arise from the intersection of individualsand their environments, then analysis conducted at the individualor environmental level will be insufficient to understand humanbehavior. In such a case, firms may want to view different environmentsas distinct markets, each with its own pattern of heterogeneouswants and competitive environment.
The paper investigated on the influence of objective environments and motivatingconditions on brand preference. The mathematicalmodel is based on the economic framework of utility maximizationand discrete choice, and it accommodates three challenges thatarise in modeling variation in brand preference. First, consumerconsideration sets and purchase histories can vary widely acrossindividuals in a relevant universe. Because brand preferencesare the dependent variables in our analysis, our method mustbe able to accommodate a large number of brands to avoid restrictingits measured variation as the objective environment and motivatingconditions change. The authors proposed a method using partial rankingdata, combined with pairwise trade-off data, to obtain estimatesof brand preference for all brands in their study. Second, themodel must allow for multiple effects, leading to both within-personand across-person heterogeneity in preferences. Variation inbrand preference is investigated within a hierarchical Bayesmodel in which motivating conditions are related to brand preferencethrough a regression model in the random effects specification.Third, it is often counterintuitive for respondents to expresspreferences for attribute combinations that do not actuallyexist. A statistical method model is proposed for decomposingaggregate brand preferences into preferences for core and extendedproduct attributes.
Data were collected from a national survey of consumer off-premisesbeer consumption. A total of 842 respondents from six differentgeographic markets participated. Data include preferred brandsets under different objective environments, brand choice rankings,product attributes, and motivating conditions. Effect sizesfor respondent and objective environment are both large. Researchers found that the level of explained variance in brand and attributepreference attributable to motivating conditions is greaterthan that accounted for by a simple interaction of respondentand environmental effects, suggesting that motivations providea more sensitive description of variation in brand preference. The findings indicate that 1) across individuals the objectiveenvironment is associated with heterogeneous, not homogeneous,motivating conditions; 2) within an individual, motivating conditionsmay change with variation in the objective environment; and3) motivating conditions are related to preferences for specificattributes.
Their results implied that the unit of analysis for marketing wasproperly a person-activity occasion. Brands, for example, areused in individual instances of behavior-a brand performswell or poorly on individual occasions of use. The relevantuniverse was enumerated in person-activity occasions rather thanin respondents. For some activities, such as doing the laundry,the occasions may typically occur in relatively unchanging environments,and it may be appropriate to allow respondents to summarizeover occasions of the activity. For other activities, such assnacking or drinking beer, the activity may occur in distinctkinds of environment. In the case of such activities, it wasappropriate to allow for the effect of changing environmentsto manifest themselves, if present. Doing so may require samplingfrom the relevant universe of person-activity occasions overan appropriate time frame. The design must be such as to recordintra-individual variability due to changes in the environmentfor action.
S. Sriram, K. PradeepChintagunta and RamyaNeelamegham (2005), in their article titled, “Effects of Brand Preference, Product Attributes, and Marketing Mix Variables in Technology Product Markets”, discussed: The authors developed a demand model for technology products that captures the effect of changes in the portfolio of models offered by a brand as well as the influence of the dynamics in its intrinsic preference on that brand’s performance. In order to account for the potential correlation in the preferences of models offered by a particular brand, researcher’s used a nested logic model with the brand (e.g., Sony) at the upper level and its various models (e.g., Mavica, FD, DSC, etc.) at the lower level of the nest. Relative model preferences were captured via their attributes and prices. Researcher’s allowed for heterogeneity across consumers in their preferences for these attributes and in their price sensitivities in addition to heterogeneity in consumers’ intrinsic brand preferences. Together with the nested logic assumption, this allows for a flexible substitution pattern across models at the aggregate level. The attractiveness of a brand’s product line changes over time with entry and exit of new models and with changes in attribute and price levels. To allow for time-varying intrinsic brand preferences, the researcher’s used a state-space model based on the Kalman filter, which captures the influence of marketing actions such as brand-level advertising on the dynamics of intrinsic brand preferences. Hence, the proposed model accounts for the effects of brand preferences, model attributes and marketing mix variables on consumer choice. First, researcher’s carried out a simulation study to ensure that their estimation procedure is able to recover the true parameters generating the data. Then, the researcher’s estimated their model parameters on data for the U.S. digital camera market. Overall, it was found that the effect of dynamics in the intrinsic brand preference was greater than the corresponding effect of the dynamics in the brand’s product line attractiveness. Assuming plausible profit margins, researcher’s evaluated the effect of increasing the advertising expenditures for the largest and the smallest brands in this category and find that these brands can increase their profitability by increasing their advertising expenditures. Researcher’s also analyzed the impact of modifying a camera model’s attributes on its profits. Such an analysis could potentially be used to evaluate if product development efforts would be profitable.
DenfordChimboza and Edward Mutandwa (2007) in their article titled, “Measuring the determinants of brand preference in a dairy product market” discussed: Branding is increasingly being used as a strategy for managing markets in developed countries while developing countries still lag behind. The objective of the study was to assess the level of brand awareness and factors underlying brand preference of dairy brands in Chitungwiza and Harare urban markets in Zimbabwe. A total of 90 respondents who included individual and institutional consumers were selected using judgmental and simple random sampling respectively. Primary data was collected using structured interview schedules developed for each category of consumers. Consumer product awareness indices, cluster analysis and factor analysis were the main tools used in the analysis. The findings of the study showed that 52% of the respondent consumers were aware of ARDA dairy brands despite having come across few ARDA DDP advertisements. Four factors were identified as key determinants of dairy product choice namely promotion, price and availability of product, attractive packaging and product quality.
Adeolu B. Ayanwale, TaiwoAlimi and Matthew A. Ayanbimipe (2005) in their article titled, “The Influence of Advertising on Consumer Brand Preference” discussed: The proliferation of assorted brands of food drinks in the country has led to cut-throat competition for increased market share being witnessed among the operators in the food drink industry. When competition is keen and the consumers are faced with brand choice in the market, it becomes imperative for the manufacturers to understand the major factors that can attract the attention of buyers to his own brand. These then form the basis for marketing planning and action. The study, which was based on a survey of 315 randomly selected consumers of food drinks in Lagos, Ibadan and Ile-Ife, cities in Southwestern Nigeria, examined the role played by advertising in influencing consumers’ preference for Bournvita, which is one of the leading food drinks in the Food and Beverage industry in Nigeria. Results revealed that both male and female and different age groups were equally influenced by advertising in their preference for the brand. 38.73% of the consumers showed preference for Bournvita out of the various brands of the food drink studied. The major reasons advanced for the preference are its captivating advertising (42.62%) and rich quality (40.16%). TV advertising was most preferred by 71.43% of the respondents of all the media used in advertising Bournvita.
The need for high preference to advertising is therefore highlighted for companies that want to not only retain their market but take positive steps to increase their market share.
Dr. G.Sridhar, Dr. N.Ramesh Kumar and Dr. G. Narasimha Murthy (2010), in their article titled, “Susceptibility to reference group influence among rural consumers”, discussed: The diversity in the reference group influence on consumer purchase in general and with reference to rural consumers was examined. The literature on reference groups’ influence on rural consumer behavior reveals the role and importance of opinion leaders and the susceptibility of consumers on reference groups for any purchase. Many findings in rural marketing domain concur with the literature on the reference group influence construct done elsewhere. Consumers who are susceptible to interpersonal influence will try to satisfy reference groups’ expectation by complying with groups’ norms. Reference groups in all had been found to have profound influence on consumers’ decision making. This influence is different for several sub cultures and situations. Consumers may accept a reference group influence because of its role in providing informational, utilitarian and value expressive influences.
Factors affecting brand preference
Brand adoption or preference has been receiving increased attention in extant literature. Cooper (1993) noted that most new innovations come with high risks as most of them failed in the marketplace creating the need for marketers to have a clear understanding of success factors in brand adoption. Theories of adoption have often been used to explain how consumers form preferences for various goods and services (Rogers, 1995; Tornasky and Klein, 1982; Mason, 1990; Charlotte, 1999). Generally, these theories emphasize on the importance of complexity, compatibility, observability, triability, relative advantage, risk, cost, communicability, divisibility, profitability, social approval, and product characteristics in brand preference (Wee, 2003). The relative importance of each factor depends on the nature of industry under consideration, location and social characteristics of the consumers of the different brands.
Consumer choice behavior has also been studied using the five-step process step (need-information search-evaluation of alternatives- purchase-post-purchase evaluation) problem solving paradigm or through the progression of consumer choice from a product class to brand choice (Dorsch et al., 2000).
Discrete choice models (Chintagunta, 1999; Bockenholt and Dillon, 2000) or neural networks to model selection decisions (Papatla et al., 2002) have also been used in brand choice research. Wee (2003) conducted a study to identify the factors affecting adoption of new product innovations in the consumer electronic industry of Singapore using qualitative (focus group discussions) and quantitative research techniques (survey with 151 respondents in the 16 – 35 year age group). The researcher considered two brands, the Mini Disc and the MP3 Portable player. Using factor analysis, seven factors were identified as critical in effecting adoption of a player: relative advantage, perceived risk, complexity, compatibility, observability, image and trialability. Of these factors, relative advantage conferred by the player was the most important factor that consumers valued in their adoption decisions.
Li and Houston (1999) employed a sample of 1200 consumers in Taiwan to determine factors underlying choice of market innovations. Price level, product variety and marketing communications factors were identified as promoters of choice. The promotional (marketing communications) mix has various elements – advertising, sales promotion, direct marketing, exhibittions, sponsorship, personal selling, word of mouth, merchandising, public relations, relationship marketing, corporate image and reputation etc.
Karjaluoto et al. (2005) investigated the consumer choice in the context of the mobile phone industry in Finland using a sample of 196 respondents. Twenty-four questions were used to assess consumer motivations in mobile phone choice. Seven estimated factors influencing mobile phone choice were Innovative services, multimedia, design, brand and basic properties, outside influence, price, and reliability explain and these accounted for about 70% of the total variance. Some of the important product decisions in any marketing context are product, variety, product performance, product features, product design, product presentation, sizes etc (Doyle, 2002).
Consumer surveys often reveal that quality is one of the most important decision factors for consumers, if not the most important (Keller, 2000). Product quality stands for the ability of a product to perform its functions (Kotler, 2003).
Consumer Behavior Analysis
Proctor et al. (1982) noted that the principle aim of consumer behavior analysis is to explain why consumers act in particular ways under certain circumstances. It tries to determine the factors that influence consumer behavior, especially the economic, social and psychological aspects which can indicate the most favored marketing mix that management should select. Consumer behavior analysis helps to determine the direction that consumer behavior is likely to make and to give preferred trends in product development, attributes of the alternative communication method etc. consumer behaviors analysis views the consumer as another variable in the marketing sequence, a variable that cannot be controlled and that will interpret the product or service not only in terms of the physical characteristics, but in the context of this image according to the social and psychological makeup of that individual consumer (or group of consumers).
Source of Influence
Zacharias et al. (2009) found that irrespective of the occupation, respondents of their study felt that friends and relatives strongly influence a consumer decision.
Erda (2009) found those personal sources; especially family and friends’ influence consumer decision making in rural markets. He found that about 29% of the sample was influenced by family and 18% by friends while taking a decision to purchase products.
Dhumal et al. (2009) observed that peer group has a significant effect on the purchasing pattern of rural consumers especially branded products.
Gupta and Mittal (2009) observed that head of the family has the highest influence on the purchase of products followed by retailers, family members and relatives.
Velayudhan (2009) found that the influence of personal sources of information is higher in rural areas when compared to urban areas. He also found that informal referent groups largest sources of information in rural markets. Incidentally, more educated consumers also used informal referent groups.
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
4.1 Demographic Factors
The major demographic factors which influence the consumer buying behavior are analyzed based on descriptive analysis. The factors which are discussed and analyzed are Age, Education, Occupation and Monthly Income. These factors fall under the two major classification which affects the consumer buying behavior known as Personal and Social Factors.
Details of Age Group
S.No Age group Frequency Percent 1 18 – 30 81 67.5 2 31 – 43 21 17.5 3 44 & above 18 15.0 4 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.1 showed that the majority 67.5% of the respondents were under 18 – 30 age group and the minority of 15% were the age of above 43. The obvious implications of this finding are the dominance of youths in the market for the products of the Bajaj brand.
Percentage of respondents based on Age group
Details of Educational Qualification
S.No Qualification Frequency Percent 1 Below +2 25 20.8 2 +2 or Diploma 35 29.2 3 UG 35 29.2 4 PG & Professionals 25 20.8 5 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.2 shows that the majority 29.2% of the respondents was +2 or Diploma or UG qualified and the minority 20.8% of the respondents was below +2 or PG & Professionals.
Percentage of respondents Education
Occupation Information about the Respondents
S.No Occupation Frequency Percent 1 Self Employed 19 15.8 2 Private Sector 55 45.8 3 Public Sector 23 19.2 4 Student 21 17.5 5 Others 2 1.7 6 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.3 shows that the majority 45.8% of the respondents was working in the private sector and the minority 1.7% was working in other than the given occupation.
Percentage of respondents Occupation
Details of Monthly Income
S.No Income Level Frequency Percent 1 5000 & below 8 6.7 2 5001 – 10000 37 30.8 3 10001 – 15000 31 25.8 4 15001 – 20000 18 15.0 5 20000 & above 26 21.7 6 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.4 shows that the majority 30.8% of the respondents was earning between 5001 and 10,000 rupees per month and the minority 6.7% of the respondents were earning between 5000 and below. This suggests that the medium income level person prefers the Bajaj brand more than the others.
Percentage of respondents Income Level
4.2 Buying Decision Process
Consumer buying behavior is influenced by the buyer’s decision-making process. Marketers have to go beyond the various influences on buyers and develop an in-depth understanding of how consumers actually make their buying decisions. Specifically, marketers must identify who makes the buying decision, the types of buying decision, and the stages in the buying process. So, the five stage model of the typical buying process was analyzed.
Need for buying the bike
S.No Need Frequency Percent 1 Workhorse 73 60.8 2 Run Errands 37 30.8 3 Routine Long Trips 10 8.3 4 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.5 shows that the majority 60.8% of the respondents was buying the bike for the purpose of using it for the regular work and the minority 8.3% was buying the bike for routine long trips.
Percentage of Need for buying the bike
Frequency Table Showing the Factors affecting the Purchasing Decision
S.No Factors R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 1 Advertisement 4 2 7 2 11 11 15 30 38 2 Power 5 18 23 13 26 12 11 8 4 3 Safety 5 14 16 29 15 15 13 11 2 4 Comfort 4 13 25 26 19 20 7 3 3 5 Price 11 30 16 21 14 16 6 6 0 6 Service 2 3 13 12 21 25 23 15 6 7 Mileage 51 26 8 7 7 4 7 8 2 8 Resale 2 1 2 3 2 5 18 28 59 9 Style 36 13 10 7 5 12 19 11 7
The above Frequency Table 4.6 shows that the majority of 51 respondents ranked the Mileage as the major factor which affects the purchasing decision of the bike followed by the Style and the majority of 59 respondents ranked the Resale Value as the minor factor which affects their purchasing decision followed by the Advertisement. This suggests that the majority of the customer prefer the Bajaj brand for mileage.
Friedman Test for Testing the Difference between the Factors:
For testing the difference between several related samples, Friedman test was used. Here, the test was applied to test the significant difference between the nine different factors which affects the purchasing decision of the bike. These factors are measured among respondents as a ranking based measure. So, the factors which affects the purchasing decision of bike are identical was used as a null hypothesis.
H0: The factors affecting the purchasing decision of bike are identical
H1: Atleast one factor is different from atleast one other factor
The result of the Friedman Test is given in Table 4.7
S.No Factors Mean Rank Std. Deviation Rank Chi-Square P value 1 Advertisement 7.04 2.171 8 321.926 .000** 2 Power 4.51 2.070 5 3 Safety 4.66 2.015 6 4 Comfort 4.37 1.791 4 5 Price 3.83 1.965 2 6 Service 5.71 1.858 7 7 Mileage 2.88 2.396 1 8 Resale Value 7.85 1.702 9 9 Style 4.17 2.836 3 Note: ** denotes significance at 1% level
Since p value is less than 0.01, the null hypothesis is rejected at 1% level of significance. Hence, it is concluded that atleast two of the factors are significantly different from each other. From the mean rank values, the mileage factor mean rank value is 2.88 which is the lowest mean and thus it is the highest ranking factor among all. Thus, it is inferred that the mileage factor is the major factor which affects the purchasing decision of the bike which is followed by the price factor of the bike.
Personal Source of Information
S.No Personal Source Frequency Percent 1 Family 45 37.5 2 Friends 62 51.7 3 Neighbors 9 7.5 4 Acquaintances 4 3.3 5 Total 120 100.0
The Personal Source of Information about the brand depicted by Table 4.8 shows that the majority 51.7% of respondents obtain information from friends and the minority 3.3% obtain from other sources.
Percentage of Personal Source of Information
Commercial Source of Information
S.No Commercial Source Frequency Percent 1 Advertisement 63 52.5 2 Sales People 26 21.7 3 Dealers 23 19.2 4 Displays 8 6.7 5 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.9 shows that the majority 52.5% of respondents obtain information from the advertisement and the minority 6.7% from displays. This suggests that the advertisement plays the major mode in the Commercial Source of Information.
Percentage of Commercial Source of Information
Experimental Source of Information
S.No Experimental Source Frequency Percent 1 Handling 50 41.7 2 Examining 36 30.0 3 Using the product 34 28.3 4 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.10 shows that the majority of 41.7% of respondents obtain information about the brand by handling the product and the minority 28.3% obtain by using the product. This suggests that the Experimental Source of Information about the brand is higher with the person who handles the product prior to the purchase.
Percentage of Experimental Source of Information
4.3 Influence of Communication Medium
Medium of Communication that influences the Brand Preference
S.No Communication Medium Frequency Percent 1 Print Media 12 10.0 2 Electronic Media 21 17.5 3 Word of Mouth 77 64.2 4 Sales Promotion 10 8.3 5 Total 120 100.0
The above Table 4.11 shows that the majority 64.2% of respondents got influenced towards the Bajaj brand through the medium of Word of Mouth Communication and the minority 8.3% of respondents influenced through Sales Promotion. It suggests that the Word of Mouth communication medium influences the Brand Preference much higher than the other medium of communication.
Percentage of Influence of Communication Medium
4.4 Purchase Mode
Mode of Purchase
S.No Purchase Mode Frequency Percent 1 By Full Cash 62 51.7 2 EMI 58 48.3 3 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.12 shows that the majority 51.7% of respondents preferred to buy the bike by full cash and the minority 48.3% of respondents preferred EMI. It suggests that the majority of the customer preferred to buy the bike by paying full cash rather than going for EMI.
4.5 Major Role Player in Decision Making
Role in Decision Making
S.No Decision Maker Frequency Percent 1 Father 19 15.8 2 Mother 1 .8 3 Friends 8 6.7 4 Self 90 75.0 5 Others 2 1.7 6 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.13 shows that the majority 75% of respondents was the final decision maker for purchasing the bike and the minority 0.8% of respondents’ opinion was Mother. It suggests that the respondents are the ultimate decision maker in buying the bike.
4.6 Period took to choose the Bajaj Brand
Period took to choose the Bajaj Brand
S.No Period Frequency Percent 1 One week 44 36.7 2 One month 32 26.7 3 Two months 26 21.7 4 More than 2 months 18 15.0 5 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.14 shows that the majority 36.7% of respondents took only one week to choose the Bajaj brand to buy the bike and the minority 15% of respondents took more than two months to choose the Bajaj brand.
Percentage of Period took to choose the Bajaj Brand
4.7 Reason for preferring the Bajaj Brand
Frequency Table Showing the Reason for preferring the Bajaj Brand
S.No Reason Frequency Percent 1 Quality 83 69.2 2 Availability 20 16.7 3 Price 15 12.5 4 Service 2 1.7 5 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.15 shows that the Quality plays the major reason in preferring the Bajaj brand for 69.2% of customers followed by the Availability of the product (16.7%).
Percentage of Preference Reason
4.8 Satisfaction towards the Product Features
Percentage of Product Features
S.No Points Price Style Color Mileage Less Maintenance Power Performance Technology 1 1 point 2.5 3.3 0 0.8 2.5 0 0.8 3.3 2 2 points 6.7 5.0 3.3 4.2 10.0 12.5 11.7 18.3 3 3 points 34.2 28.3 35.8 34.2 37.5 35.0 35.8 35.0 4 4 points 43.3 35.0 37.5 45.0 33.3 37.5 38.3 32.5 5 5 points 13.3 28.3 23.3 15.8 16.7 15.0 13.3 10.8 6 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
1 point refers to Highly Dissatisfied
2 points refers to Dissatisfied
3 points refers to Neutral
4 points refers to Satisfied
5 points refers to Highly Satisfied
The Table 4.16 shows that the majority 43.3%, 35%, 37.5%, 45%, 37.5% and 38.3% of respondents are satisfied with the price, style, color, mileage, power and performance of their bike respectively. The table also shows that the majority 37.5% and 35% of respondents are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with the less maintenance and technology of their bike respectively.
4.9 Test of Finding the Significant Difference
To test the significant difference between age group with regard to the satisfaction with the total features of the bike, one way ANOVA test also known as F test was used.
H0: There is no significant difference between age group with regard to the
satisfaction with the total features of the bike
H1: There is a significant difference between age group with regard to the satisfaction
with the total features of the bike
The result of the ANOVA analysis is given in Table 4.17
ANOVA – Total Features
S.No Groups Sum of Squares df Mean Square F value P value 1 Between Groups 368.572 2 184.286 10.844 .000** 2 Within Groups 1988.353 117 16.994 3 Total 2356.925 119 Note: ** denotes significance at 1% level
Since P value is less than 0.01 the null hypothesis is rejected at 1% level of significance on age group. Hence, there is a significant difference between age group with regard to the satisfaction with the total features of the bike. Hence, descriptive statistics was used to find the age group who are more satisfied with the bike features. The Table 4.18 shows the Descriptive Statistics.
S.No Age Group N Mean Std. Deviation 1 18 – 30 81 28.21 4.309 2 31 – 43 21 27.43 3.641 3 44 & above 18 32.89 3.740 4 Total 120 28.78 4.450 The Table 4.18 indicates that the variable ’44 & above’ has the highest mean value of 32.89. This suggests that the respondents under the age group 44 and above are more satisfied with the features of the bike than the other age group respondents.
4.10 Rating of Showroom Attributes
Percentage of Showroom Attributes
S.No Rating Infrastructure Availability Response Knowledge Service 1 Excellent 3.3 4.2 3.3 5.0 10.0 2 Good 50.0 50.8 24.2 38.3 28.3 3 Average 42.5 32.5 55.0 45.8 41.7 4 Poor 3.3 11.7 16.7 9.2 15.8 5 Worse .8 0.8 0.8 1.7 4.2 6 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
The Table 4.19 shows that the majority 50% and 50.8% of respondents rated the infrastructure of the showroom and the product availability in the showroom was good respectively. The table also shows that the majority 55%, 45.8% and 41.7% of respondents rated the after sales response of the dealer, knowledge of the salesman and the service of the dealer was average respectively.
4.11 Test of Difference between the Recommendation of Dealer and Showroom Satisfaction
H0: There is no significant difference between levels of recommendation of dealer
with regard to the satisfaction with the total showroom attributes
H1: There is a significant difference between levels of recommendation of dealer with
regard to the satisfaction with the total showroom attributes
The result of the ANOVA analysis is given in Table 4.20
Table 4.20 ANOVA – Total Showroom Attributes
S.No Groups Sum of Squares df Mean Square F value P value 1 Between Groups 257.100 4 64.275 12.526 .000** 2 Within Groups 590.100 115 5.131 3 Total 847.200 119 Note: ** denotes significance at 1% level
Since P value is less than 0.01 the null hypothesis is rejected at 1% level of significance on level of recommendation of dealer. Hence, there is a significant difference between levels of recommendation of dealer with regard to the satisfaction with the total showroom attributes. Hence, descriptive statistics was used to find the level of recommendation best described by the respondents. The Table 4.21 shows the Descriptive Statistics.
Table 4.21 Descriptive Statistics
S.No Level of Recommendation N Mean Std. Deviation 1 Highly Recommend 13 10.9231 3.27774 2 Recommend 31 12.5806 1.91092 3 Neutral 57 13.4211 2.22765 4 Not Recommend 15 14.8667 2.26358 5 Highly Not Recommend 4 19.0000 .81650 6 Total 120 13.3000 2.66821
The Table 4.21 indicates that the variable ‘Highly Recommend’ has the least mean value of 10.9. This suggests that the respondents highly recommend the showroom because of their satisfaction with the attributes of the showroom.
4.12 Role of Availability of Product during Purchase in the Selection of Brand
Role of availability in the selection of brand
S.No Role of availability Frequency Percent 1 Very High 25 20.8 2 High 62 51.7 3 Average 33 27.5 4 Low 0 0 5 Very Low 0 0 6 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.22 shows that the majority 51.7% of respondents’ opinions was high about the role of availability of product in the selection of brand and the no response in the last two rating shows that the importance of availability is always higher in the selection of brand.
4.13 Trust Level on the Bajaj Brand
Trust Level on the Bajaj Brand
S.No Trust Level Frequency Percent 1 Very High 23 19.2 2 High 49 40.8 3 Average 46 38.3 4 Low 2 1.7 5 Very Low 0 0 6 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.23 shows that the majority 40.8% of respondents’ opinions was high about their trust level on the Bajaj brand and the no response on the ‘Very Low’ rating of the Trust Level shows that all the respondents possess atleast some Trust on the Bajaj Brand.
4.14 Customer Reaction during the Unavailability of Product during Purchase
Reaction of customer when Bajaj brand is not available during the purchase
S.No Reaction of the customer Frequency Percent 1 Wait for sometime 37 30.8 2 Going to the other dealer in another region 49 40.8 3 Choosing the other product category under Bajaj 19 15.8 4 Choosing other brand with the same features of the product 15 12.5 5 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.24 shows that the majority 40.8% of respondents will go to the other dealer in another region for buying the Bajaj bike if the required brand is not available during the purchase with a particular dealer and only the 12.5% of respondents agreed that they will change the brand if the brand is not available during the purchase.
4.15 Satisfaction towards Some Significant Attributes
Percentage of Satisfaction on the given Attributes
S.No Satisfaction Level Safety Comfort Availability Product Price Spare Parts Price 1 Highly Satisfied 8.3 7.5 6.7 1.7 5.0 2 Satisfied 63.3 68.3 29.2 45.0 27.5 3 Neutral 27.5 24.2 58.3 41.7 53.3 4 Dissatisfied .8 0 5.8 11.7 14.2 5 Highly Dissatisfied 0 0 0 0 0 6 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
The Table 4.25 shows that the majority 63.3%, 68.3% and 45% of respondents were satisfied with the safety, comfort and the price of their bike respectively. The table also shows that the majority 58.3% and 53.3% of respondents were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with the availability of the spare parts and the price of the spare parts of their bike respectively.
4.16 Test of Significant Relationship between Satisfaction on Safety and Comfort
To test the relationship between the level of satisfaction with regard to safety and comfort of the bike, Correlation test was used. So, the test variables were the level of satisfaction on safety and the level of satisfaction on comfort. Correlation test was applied to establish the qualitative relationship between these two variables and thereby it is possible to find the direction of relationship between the variables.
H0: There is no relationship between the level of satisfaction with regard to safety and
comfort of the bike
H1: There is a relationship between the level of satisfaction with regard to safety and
comfort of the bike
The result of Correlation Analysis is given in Table 4.26
Correlation between Level of Satisfaction of Safety and Comfort
S.No Variable Correlation Value (Pearson Correlation) P value 1 Safety 0.521** 0.000 2 Comfort ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Since p value is less than 0.01, the null hypothesis is rejected at 1% level of significance. Hence, there is a relationship between the level of satisfaction with regard to safety and comfort of the bike. The Correlation square between the safety and comfort satisfaction level is 0.521 which indicates 52% positive relationship between them.
4.17 One Way ANOVA Test for Finding the Significant Difference between the Variables
To test the significant difference between age group with regard to the satisfaction with the total price of the bike and its spare parts, one way ANOVA test also known as F test was used.
H0: There is no significant difference between age group with regard to the
satisfaction with the total price of the bike and its spare parts
H1: There is a significant difference between age group with regard to the satisfaction
with the total price of the bike and its spare parts
The result of the ANOVA analysis is given in Table 4.27
Table 4.27 ANOVA – Total Price
S.No Groups Sum of Squares df Mean Square F value P value 1 Between Groups 15.484 2 7.742 5.109 .007** 2 Within Groups 177.316 117 1.516 3 Total 192.800 119 Note: ** denotes significance at 1% level
Since P value is less than 0.01 the null hypothesis is rejected at 1% level of significance on age group. Hence, there is a significant difference between age group with regard to the satisfaction with the total price of the bike and its spare parts. Hence, descriptive statistics was used to find the satisfaction of total price and its spare parts best described by the respondents. The Table 4.28 shows the Descriptive Statistics.
Table 4.28 Descriptive Statistics
S.No Age Group N Mean Std. Deviation 1 18 – 30 81 5.5802 1.12765 2 31 – 43 21 5.4286 1.43427 3 44 & above 18 4.5556 1.42343 4 Total 120 5.4000 1.27286 The Table 4.28 indicates that the variable ’44 & above’ has the least mean value of 4.55. This suggests that the respondents of age group 44 and above are satisfied with the total price of the bike and its spare parts than other age group respondents.
4.18 Overall Service Experience of Respondents
Rating of overall service experience
S.No Rating Frequency Percent 1 Excellent 5 4.2 2 Very Good 16 13.3 3 Good 62 51.7 4 Okay 31 25.8 5 Poor 6 5.0 6 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.35 shows that the majority 51.7% of respondents rated their overall service experience with regards to their bike was Good and the minority 4.2% of respondents rated their overall service experience with regard to their bike was Excellent.
4.19 Overall Satisfaction of the Bajaj bike of the Respondents
Overall satisfaction level with regards to the Bajaj bike
S.No Satisfaction Level Frequency Percent 1 Highly Satisfied 15 12.5 2 Satisfied 62 51.7 3 Neutral 40 33.3 4 Dissatisfied 3 2.5 5 Highly Dissatisfied 0 0 6 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.30 shows that the majority 51.7% of respondents were satisfied with their Bajaj bike after purchase. This suggests that the majority of the customers don’t experience the post-purchase dissonance (after-sale discomfort). It is because of the marketer’s after-sale communications which provide evidence and support to help customers feel good about their brand choices.
4.20 Test of Significant Relationship between the Satisfaction of Bike and the Service Experience
To test the relationship between the overall satisfaction with regard to the Bajaj bike and the overall service experience of the bike, Correlation test was used. So, the test variables were the overall satisfaction and the service experience. Correlation test was applied to establish the qualitative relationship between these two variables and thereby it is possible to find the direction of relationship between the variables.
H0: There is no relationship between the overall satisfaction with regard to the Bajaj
bike and the overall service experience of the bike
H1: There is a relationship between the overall satisfaction with regard to the Bajaj
bike and the overall service experience of the bike
The result of Correlation Analysis is given in Table 4.31
Correlation between Overall Satisfaction and Service Experience
S.No Variable Correlation Value (Pearson Correlation) P value 1 Overall Satisfaction 0.285** 0.002 2 Service Experience ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Since p value is less than 0.01, the null hypothesis is rejected at 1% level of significance. Hence, there is a relationship between the overall satisfaction with regard to the Bajaj bike and the overall service experience of the bike. The Correlation square between the overall satisfaction with regard to the Bajaj bike and the overall service experience of the bike is 0.285 which indicates 28% positive relationship between them.
Since the relationship is positive, if the Overall Satisfaction of the Bajaj bike increases then the Satisfaction in the Service Experience of the bike also increases.
4.21 Decision regarding Buying One More Bike
Future Purchase Decision
S.No Future Purchase Decision Frequency Percent 1 Choosing the same Bajaj brand 77 64.2 2 Choosing the other brand 43 35.8 3 Total 120 100.0
The decision regarding buying one more bike was depicted in the Table 4.32. It shows that 64.2% of respondents will buy the same Bajaj brand. This suggests that the maximum of current Bajaj customers are showing the Brand Loyalty and the remaining 35.8% of respondents are tend to possess the variety seeking buying behavior. So, this brand switching may occurs among the customers for the sake of variety rather than because of dissatisfaction.
4.22 Respondents’ Level of Promoting the Bajaj Brand to Others
Level of promoting the Bajaj brand
S.No Level of Promotion Frequency Percent 1 Very High 15 12.5 2 High 40 33.3 3 Average 58 48.3 4 Low 4 3.3 5 Very Low 3 2.5 6 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.33 shows that on an average 48.3% of respondents will promote the Bajaj brand to others and the minority 2.5% of respondents will never promote the brand to others. This result not only shows the Brand Loyalty of the customers but also shows the impact in the word of mouth communication medium.
4.23 Test of Level of Promotion of Bajaj Brand to Others
To test the level of promoting the Bajaj brand to others is above average level at 1% level of significance, T-Test for Single Mean was applied.
H0: The level of promoting the Bajaj brand to others is equal to average level
H1: The level of promoting the Bajaj brand to others is not equal to average level
The result of T-Test is given in Table 4.34
One Sample T-Test for the level of promotion at 1% level
Test value = 3 S.No Test Variable N Mean Std. Deviation T value df P value 1 Level of Promotion 120 2.50 .850 -6.443 119 .000** Note: ** denotes significance at 1% level
Since P value is less than 0.01, the null hypothesis is rejected at 1% level of significance. Hence it is concluded that the level of promoting the Bajaj brand to others is not equal to average level. The Table 4.34 indicates the mean value for the variable ‘Level of Promotion’ is 2.5. It suggests that the respondent’s level of promoting the Bajaj brand is higher.
4.24 Respondents’ Level of Recommendation of Dealer to Others
Level of recommendation of dealer to others
S.No Level of Recommendation Frequency Percent 1 Highly Recommend 13 10.8 2 Recommend 31 25.8 3 Neutral 57 47.5 4 Not Recommend 15 12.5 5 Highly Not Recommend 4 3.3 6 Total 120 100.0
The Table 4.35 shows that the majority 47.5% of respondents remains neutral in recommending their dealer to others and the minority 3.3% of respondents will never ever recommend the dealer to others.
4.25 Level of Brand Preference with respect to Educational Qualification
To test the association between the educational qualification and the level of brand preference, Chi-Square test was applied.
H0: There is no significant association between the Educational Qualification and the
Level of Brand Preference
H1: There is a significant association between the Educational Qualification and the
Level of Brand Preference
The result of the Chi-Square Cross tabulation Analysis is given in Table 4.36
Crosstabs between Educational Qualification and Brand Preference Level
S.No Educational Qualification Frequency Level of Brand Preference Total Chi-Square Value P value Low Moderate High 1 Below +2 Observed 5 15 5 25 4.036 .672 Expected 6.9 11.9 6.3 25 2 +2 or Diploma Observed 12 13 10 35 Expected 9.6 16.6 8.8 35 3 UG Observed 8 17 10 35 Expected 9.6 16.6 8.8 35 4 PG & Professionals Observed 8 12 5 25 Expected 6.9 11.9 6.3 25 5 Total Observed 33 57 30 120 Expected 33 57 30 120 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 6.25.
Since p value is greater than 0.05 the null hypothesis is accepted at 5% level of significance. Hence, there is no significant association between the Educational Qualification and the Level of Brand Preference.
4.26 Level of Brand Preference with respect to the Adulthood
To test the significant difference between the adulthood with regard to the level of Brand Preference, t-test for difference of two mean was applied. The Hypothesis was set as follows.
H0: There is no significant difference between the adulthood with regard to the level
of Brand Preference
H1: There is a significant difference between the adulthood with regard to the level of
The result of Independent Sample t-Test is given in Table 4.37
t-Test for Level of Brand Pref and adulthood
S.No Adulthood N Mean Std. Deviation t value p value 1 Young Adult 103 14.28 2.475 3.143 .002** 2 Older Adult 17 12.24 2.562 Note: ** denotes significance at 1% level
Since p value is less than 0.01 the null hypothesis is rejected at 1% level of significance on adulthood. Hence, there is a significant difference between the adulthood with regard to the level of Brand Preference.
The Table 4.37 indicates that the mean value of the variable ‘Older Adult’ 12.24 is the least value. It suggests that the Brand Preference towards the Bajaj is higher with the Older Adults than the Younger Adults.
FINDINGS, SUGGESTION AND CONCLUSION
1. The majority 67.5% of the respondents were under 18 – 30 age group and the minority of 15% were the age of above 43.
2. The majority 29.2% of the respondents was +2 or Diploma or UG qualified and the minority 20.8% of the respondents was below +2 or PG & Professionals.
3. The majority 45.8% of the respondents was working in the private sector and the minority 1.7% was working in other than the private sector, public sector, self-employed.
4. The majority 30.8% of the respondents was earning between 5001 and 10,000 rupees per month and the minority 6.7% of the respondents were earning between 5000 and below.
5. The majority 60.8% of the respondents was buying the bike for the purpose of using it for the regular work and the minority 8.3% was buying the bike for routine long trips.
6. The majority of 51 respondents ranked the mileage as the major factor which affects the purchasing decision of the bike followed by the style and the majority of 59 respondents ranked the resale value as the minor factor which affects their purchasing decision followed by the advertisement.
7. From the Friedman Test, it was found that atleast two of the factors which affect the purchasing decision of the bike are significantly different from each other among the nine different factors which includes mileage, price and style.
8. The majority 51.7% of respondents obtain information about the brand from friends and the minority 3.3% obtain from other personal sources.
9. The majority 52.5% of respondents obtain information about the brand from the advertisement and the minority 6.7% from displays.
10. The majority of 41.7% of respondents obtain information about the brand by handling the product and the minority 28.3% obtain by using the product.
11. The majority 64.2% of respondents got influenced towards the Bajaj brand through the medium of Word of Mouth Communication and the minority 8.3% of respondents influenced through Sales Promotion.
12. The majority 51.7% of respondents preferred to buy the bike by full cash and the minority 48.3% of respondents preferred EMI.
13. The majority 75% of respondents was the final decision maker for purchasing the bike and the minority 0.8% of respondents’ opinion was Mother.
14. The majority 36.7% of respondents took only one week to choose the Bajaj brand to buy the bike and the minority 15% of respondents took more than two months to choose the Bajaj brand.
15. The Quality plays the major reason in preferring the Bajaj brand for 69.2% of customers followed by the Availability of the product (16.7%).
16. The majority 43.3%, 35%, 37.5%, 45%, 37.5% and 38.3% of respondents are satisfied with the price, style, color, mileage, power and performance of their bike respectively. I was also found that the majority 37.5% and 35% of respondents are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with the less maintenance and technology of their bike respectively.
17. From the One Way ANOVA Test, it was found that there is a significant difference between age group with regard to the satisfaction with the total features of the bike.
18. The majority 50% and 50.8% of respondents rated the infrastructure of the showroom and the product availability in the showroom was good respectively. It was also found that the majority 55%, 45.8% and 41.7% of respondents rated the after sales response of the dealer, knowledge of the salesman and the service of the dealer was average respectively.
19. The majority 51.7% of respondents’ opinions was high about the role of availability of product in the selection of brand and the no response in the last two rating shows that the importance of availability is always higher in the selection of brand.
20. The majority 40.8% of respondents’ opinions was high about their trust level on the Bajaj brand and the no response on the ‘Very Low’ rating of the Trust Level shows that all the respondents possess atleast some Trust on the Bajaj Brand.
21. The majority 40.8% of respondents will go to the other dealer in another region for buying the Bajaj bike if the required brand is not available during the purchase with a particular dealer and only the 12.5% of respondents agreed that they will change the brand if the brand is not available during the purchase.
22. The majority 63.3%, 68.3% and 45% of respondents were satisfied with the safety, comfort and the price of their bike respectively. The table also shows that the majority 58.3% and 53.3% of respondents were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with the availability of the spare parts and the price of the spare parts of their bike respectively.
23. From the Correlation Test, it was found that there is a relationship between the level of satisfaction with regard to safety and comfort of the bike and it also indicates 52% positive relationship between them.
24. From the One Way ANOVA Test, it was found that there is a significant difference between age group with regard to the satisfaction with the total price of the bike and its spare parts.
25. The majority 51.7% of respondents rated their overall service experience with regards to their bike was Good and the minority 4.2% of respondents rated their overall service experience with regard to their bike was Excellent.
26. The majority 51.7% of respondents were satisfied with their Bajaj bike after purchase.
27. From the Correlation Test, it was found that there is a relationship between the overall satisfaction with regard to the Bajaj bike and the overall service experience of the bike and it also indicates 28% positive relationship between them.
28. It was found that the 64.2% of respondents will buy the same Bajaj brand if they involve in future purchase and the remaining 35.8% of respondents’ opinion were buying bike from other brand.
29. It was found that on an average 48.3% of respondents will promote the Bajaj brand to others and the minority 2.5% of respondents will never promote the brand to others.
30. From the One Sample T-Test, it was found that the level of promoting the Bajaj brand to others is not equal to average.
31. The majority 47.5% of respondents remains neutral in recommending their dealer to others and the minority 3.3% of respondents will never ever recommend the dealer to others.
32. From the One Way ANOVA Test, it was found that there is a significant difference between levels of recommendation of dealer with regard to the satisfaction with the total showroom attributes.
33. From the Independent Sample T-Test, it was found that there is a significant difference between the adulthood with regard to the level of Brand Preference.
34. From the Chi-Square Test, it was found that there is no significant association between the educational qualification and the level of brand preference.
* The study revealed that the Brand Preference for Bajaj Two Wheeler’s among Customers in Vellore is higher among the Older Adults and the maximum of current Bajaj customers are showing the Brand Loyalty.
* The study also revealed that the major factor which influences the preference of Bajaj brand is Mileage followed by Style and Price of the product. Bajaj brand is already famous for its mileage and the style of the product. But, the study shows that the price factor is only satisfied, not even with 50% of the respondents. It is because of the higher cost of the Bajaj two wheelers. The Sales of the Bajaj two wheelers can be increased by reducing the cost of the product which is the third major factor which influences the Brand Preference.
* Since, Style is the second major factor which influences the Brand Preference among the customers in Vellore; Bajaj can launch its Probike ‘Ninja 250R’ in the Vellore Showroom. The Sale of that particular product may increase in Vellore because of its Style and the dominance of the youths in the market for the products of Bajaj brand.
* Apart from budget, two most important factors in a bike are Safety and Comfort. From the study it was discovered that more than 50% of the respondents are satisfied with the Safety and Comfort Level of the Bajaj bike. But there are still some issues which need to be look over in the Safety and Comfort aspects. From the open-ended suggestion also, most of the customer’s opinion was that the Bajaj two wheelers are lacking in those two aspects. The main aspects which the Bajaj has to concentrate are ‘Powerful Headlights’ and ‘Braking’.
* The Bajaj should concentrate on the after-sale communications which provide evidence and support to help customers feel good about their brand choices. It helps in reducing the after-sale discomfort.
* From the study, 35.8% of respondents are switching to the other brand which is only because of variety seeking behavior rather than expressing the disloyalty. Bajaj should launch two wheelers with different innovative features by studying the competitive products to reduce its customer from switching to the competitive brands.
After the completion of this project, I’ve gained some new experience in the Field Research. During survey, I’ve met a large number of people with different perception and behavior. It was a great opportunity for me to learn about the customer behavior and I utilized it properly to learn the same. From this study, it is concluded that the Brand Preference for Bajaj two wheelers among customers is higher in Vellore. However, Bajaj may improve into a highly trustful and preferable brand if the suggestions are incorporated. It is difficult to acquire new customers and it is more difficult to retain the existing customers. In the case of two wheelers, purchase is an expensive and infrequent or risky purchase where customers will face a high-involvement decision. So, not only for the initial purchase but also to ensure the future purchase, it is advisable to implement the suggestions to retain the customers.
A Study on Brand Preference for Bajaj Two Wheeler’s among Customers in Vellore
Name: Contact No: Age:
o Below +2 o +2 or Diploma o UG o PG & Professionals Occupation
o Self employed o Private Sector o Public Sector o Student o Others Monthly Income (If Student, mention your family income)
o 5000 & below o 5001- 10000 o 10001-15000 o 15001-20000 o 20000 & above
1. What is the need for you to buy the bike?
o Workhorse (for regular work) o Run Errands (to do odd jobs) o Routine Long trips
2. Prioritize the options that affect your purchasing decision of bike.
1 being the most important and 8 being the less important
? Advertisement ? Comfort ? Mileage ? Power ? Price ? Resale Value ? Safety ? Service ? Style
3. Select the source which plays a major role in obtaining information about the brand.
Source * Select one from each Personal Source Family Friends Neighbors Acquaintances Commercial Source Advertisement Sales People Dealers Displays Experimental Source Handling Examining Using the product
4. What is the medium of communication that influences your brand preference?
o Print Media o Electronic Media o Word of Mouth o Sales Promotion
5. Which mode of purchase do you prefer?
o By Full Cash o EMI
6. Who plays the major role in decision making for purchasing the bike?
o Father o Mother o Friends o Self o Others
7. What is the period you took to choose the Bajaj brand?
o One Week o One Month o Two Months o More than 2 Months 8. What is the reason for preferring the Bajaj brand?
o Quality o Availability o Price o Service
9. Give points to the following features of your Bajaj product.
Attribute 5 4 3 2 1 Price Style Color Mileage Less Maintenance Power Performance Technology
10. Rate the showroom attributes.
Attributes Excellent Good Average Poor Worse Infrastructure Availability After Sales Response Knowledge of Sales man Service
11. Rate your bike on the basis of following attributes.
Attribute Very High High Average Low Very Low Role of availability in the selection of brand
Trust Level on the Bajaj brand
12. What will be your reaction when Bajaj brand is not available during the purchase?
o Wait for sometime o Choosing the other product category under Bajaj o Going to the other Bajaj dealer in another region o Choosing other brand with the same features of the product
13. Rate your bike on the basis of following attributes.
Attribute Highly Satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Highly Dissatisfied Safety Comfort Availability of spare parts Price of the product Price of the spare parts
14. How do you rate the overall service experience of your Bajaj bike?
o Excellent o Very Good o Good o Okay o Poor
15. What is your overall satisfaction level with regards to the Bajaj bike?
o Highly Satisfied o Satisfied o Neutral o Dissatisfied o Highly Dissatisfied
16. What is your decision regarding buying one more bike?
o Choosing the same Bajaj brand o Choosing the other brand
17. What is the level that you promote the Bajaj brand to others?
o Very High o High o Average o Low o Very Low
18. Do you recommend your dealer to others?
o Highly Recommend o Recommend o Neutral o Not Recommend o Highly Not Recommend
19. What do you expect more from your bike? (Eg: New Features or other recommendations)
Mode: (Signature of the Respondent)
1. Govindarajan M, “Marketing Management – Concepts, Cases, Challenges and Trends”, Second Edition, New Delhi, PHI Learning Private Limited, May 2009, Page no: 89-110.
2. Kotler, Philip, “Marketing Management Millennium Edition”, New Jersey, Pearson Education Company, 2002.
3. Ravilochanan P, “Research Methodology”, Chennai, Margham Publications, 2002, Page no: 22.1-23.87.
1. Niedrich, Ronald W. and Swain, Scott D, “The Influence of Pioneer Status and Experience Order on Consumer Brand Preference: A Mediated-Effects Model”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,Volume 31, October 2003, Page no: 468-480.
2. Dr. Rajagopal, “Conational Drivers Influencing Brand Preference Among Consumers”, 2009.
3. Purohit?H C, “Customer Relationship Management and Brand Loyalty through Word Of Mouth (WOM) Communication”, The Journal of Indian Management & Strategy, Volume 13, Issue 3, 2008, Print ISSN: 0973-9335, Online ISSN: 0973-9343.
4. Yang, Sha, Allenby, Gerg M. and Fennel, Geraldine, “Modeling Variation in Brand Preference: The Roles of Objective Environment and Motivating Conditions”, Volume 21, No 1, Winter 2002, Page no: 14-31.
5. Sriram S, Chintagunta, Pradeep K and Neelamegham, Ramya, “Effects of Brand Preference, Product Attributes, and Marketing Mix Variables in Technology Product Markets”, 2005.
6. Chimboza, Denford and Mutandwa, Edward, “Measuring the determinants of brand preference in a dairy product market”, African Journal of Business Management, Volume 1, No 9, December 2007, Page no: 230-237, ISSN 1993-8233.
7. Ayanwale, Adeolu B, Alimi, Taiwo and Ayanbimipe, Matthew A, “The Influence of Advertising on Consumer Brand Preference”, Journal of Social Science, Volume 10, No 1, 2005, Page no: 9-16.
8. Dr. Sridhar. G, Dr. Kumar, Ramesh N and Dr. Murthy, Narasimha G, “Susceptibility to reference group influence among rural consumers”, Metamorphosis, Volume 9, No 1, 2010.
9. Dr. Reddy, Mallikarjuna K, “Consumer behavior towards two-wheeler motor bikes”, Department of Business Management, Osmania University, Hyderabad.