customer satisfaction with regard to service quality...

- 111 -

CHAPTER - IV

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION WITH REGARD TO SERVICE QUALITY

RENDERED BY DEPARTMENTAL STORES

In retail business, the quality of service and customer

satisfaction are the deciding factors for any purchase. The

customers attach considerable value on the quality and

responsiveness of an organization’s service component, as well as

product quality and availability in making purchase decisions.

Customer satisfaction is the key to the success of any retail

business. Measuring customer satisfaction would su ggest the

strengths and weaknesses of a concern and it paves way for

improvement and sustains their business in the present competitive

scenario. Hence this study makes an attempt to measure customer

satisfaction on the basis of actual service experienced by the buyers

against the five service quality dimensions such as tangibles,

reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy.

In order to study the customer satisfaction it was imperative

to learn the general profile of the respondents and their sho pping

habits. Hence the questionnaire had been divided into three parts,

namely

i) General profile of the respondents.

ii) Shopping habits of the customers.

iii) Customer satisfaction towards the five dimensions of

service quality.

- 112 -

The profile of the respondents had been assimilated into

several variables such as age, gender , education, occupation,

monthly income and family size. The profile-details of the

respondents, from their response to the questionnaire were

tabulated and the resultant tables were consolidated and worked out

into a single master table as given below.

Table IV.a

General profile of the respondents

Sl. No. Particulars No. of Respondents Percentage

1. Age

Up to 20 years 28 4.7

21-30 years 223 37.2

31-40 years 286 47.7

Above 40 years 63 10.5

2. Gender

Male 236 39.3

Female 364 60.7

3 Education

Below 10th

standard 64 10.7

10th

– 12th

standard 166 27.7

Graduate 276 46.0

Post graduate 94 15.7

4. Occupation

Government official 92 15.3

Businessman 99 16.5

Professional 64 10.7

Private employee 113 18.8

House wife 190 31.7

Others 42 7.0

- 113 -

5. Income (Monthly)

Rs. 5000-10000 108 18.0

Rs.10001-20000 434 72.3

Rs. 20001-30000 56 9.3

Above Rs. 30000 2 0.3

6. Family Size

2-4 members 349 58.2

5-7 members 242 40.3

Above 7 members 9 1.5

Source: Primary data

From the above table it is clear that 47.7 percent of the

respondents were under the age group of 31-40 years, 37.2 percent

under the age group of 21- 30 years. It may be noticed that majority

(85 %) of the respondents were within the age group of 21-40 years.

Those with below 20 years and above 40 years were found to be

much less in number which accounts for just 15 percent of the total

respondents.

Regarding gender-wise classification of respondents it was

found that out of the 600 respondents, 236 (39.3 %) were male

members and the remaining 364 (60.7%) were female. Hence, in the

current study a majority of 60.7 percent (364) of the respondents

were female.

To mention the educational level of the respondents, 46

percent of the respondents were graduates and 15.7 percent were

post graduates. Only 10.7 percent had a qualification below 10th

standard. Thus a major portion of the respondents were

well-educated as 61.7 percent were graduates and post graduates.

- 114 -

The above table clearly pictured that out of 600 respondents,

31.7 percent were housewives, 18.8 percent were employed in

private organizations, 16.5 percent were businessmen, 15.3 percent

were government officials, 10.7 percent and 7 percent of the

respondents were professionals and persons employed in other

sectors respectively. Thus, the majority of the shoppers were

housewives who would personally undertake the task of shopping

for the family.

The monthly income of the respondents at various levels did

vary. It was obvious from the table that 72.3 percent (434) of the

respondents earned an income between Rs.10001-20000, whereas

Rs. 5,000-10,000 was earned by 18 percent of the respondents per

month, followed by 9.3 percent and 0.3 percent of the respondents

who had an income between Rs.20001-30,000 and above Rs.30,000

per month respectively. Thus the majority of the respondents

(72.3%) on an average earned an amount between Rs.10, 000 and

Rs.20, 000 monthly.

To mention about the family size of the respondents, it may

be seen from the table that out of 600 sample respondents, 58.2

percent (349) had a small family with 2-4 members and 40.3

percent (242) with 5-7 members. Only 1.5 percent (9) of them had

a large family with more than 7 members. Therefore the majority of

the respondents belonged to the nuclear family type.

- 115 -

Chart IV.a.1

Age of the respondents

4.7

37.2

47.7

10.5

Up to 20 years

21-30 years

31-40 years

Above 40 years

- 116 -

Chart IV.a.2

Gender of the respodnents

39.3

60.7

Male

Female

- 117 -

Chart IV.a.3

Educational Qualification of the respondents

10.7

27.7

46

15.7

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Below 10th

standard

10th – 12th

standard

Graduate Post Graduate

Educational Qualification

Perc

en

tag

e

- 118 -

Chart IV.a.4

Occupation of the respondents

15.316.5

10.7

18.8

31.7

7

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Gove

rnm

ent o

ffic

ial

Busi

nessm

an

Pro

fess

ional

Priv

ate

emplo

yee

House

wife

Oth

ers

Occupation

Perc

en

tag

e

- 119 -

18

72.3

9.3

0.3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Perc

en

tag

e

Rs. 5000-

10000

Rs.10001-

20000

Rs. 20001-

30000

Above Rs.

30000

Income

Chart IV.a.5

Income of the respondents

- 120 -

Chart IV.a.6

Family size of the respondents

58.2

40.3

1.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2-4 members 5-7 members Above 7 members

Family Size

Perc

en

tag

e

- 121 -

Shopping habits of the respondents

The second part of the questionnaire was designed to learn the

shopping habits and preferences of the respondents such as persons

with whom they shop, their liking and reason for selecting a

particular shop, frequency of visit per month, amount spent on

purchase, mode of payment, source through which the store was

introduced to them and their willingness to continue shopping at the

same store and recommend the same to others as well have been

tabulated below.

- 122 -

Table IV.b

Shopping habits of the respondents

Sl.

No.

Variable No. of

Respondents

Percentage

1 I often go for shopping

Alone 209 34.8

With spouse 200 33.3

With family 157 26.2

With friends 34 5.7

2 The reason for purchasing from the

same shop

Large variety of products 80 13.3

The service provided is good 21 3.5

Reasonable price 264 44.0

Good store environment 188 31.3

Parking facility 36 6.0

Convenient location 9 1.5

Others 2 0.3

3 No. of visits per month

Once 143 23.8

Twice 378 63.0

Thrice 60 10.0

Frequently 19 3.2

4 Amount spent on purchase per visit

Below Rs.500 234 39.0

Rs.500 – 1000 321 53.5

Above Rs.1000 45 7.5

- 123 -

5 Source through which the store was

known

Relatives 133 22.2

Friends 76 12.7

Neighbours / Colleagues 323 53.8

Advertisements 68 11.3

6 Recommend the store to others

Strongly not recommended 2 0.3

Not recommended 2 0.3

Somewhat recommended 222 37.0

Recommended 371 61.8

Strongly recommended 3 0.5

7 Mode of payment on purchase

Cash 416 69.3

Credit cards 184 30.7

8 Plan to switch over to another shop

Yes 220 36.7

No 380 63.3

Source: Primary Data

In the above table the persons who had accompanied the

respondents for shopping is statistically estimated and shown. It

indicated that 34.8 percent (209) of the total respondents had gone

shopping alone and 33.3 percent (200) of them had gone with their

spouse and the rest with family and friends. Hence the majority ,

- 124 -

68.1 percent (409) of the respondents had gone shopping either

alone or with their spouse.

While listing down the reasons for choosing a particular shop,

the respondents had given priority to reasonable price (44%), good

store environment (31.3%) and more choices of product (13.3%)

with the rest prioritizing convenient parking , location and good

service provided. Hence a majority , 75 percent (452) of the

respondents had chosen a particular shop giving importance to

reasonable price and good store environment.

The table shows the number of times per month the

respondents visit the shop and it is evident from the table that 63

percent of the respondents had visited the shop twice i n a month,

followed by 23.8 percent and 10 percent of the respondents who had

visited the shop once and thrice respectively. Only 3.2 percent of

them had visited frequently . Hence, the majority of 63 percent

(378) of the respondents had visited the shop twice in a month.

The above table shows the amount spent on purchase in one

visit by the respondents. It is evident from the table that 53.5

percent of the respondents had spent Rs.500 - 1000, followed by 39

percent and 7.5 percent of the respondents who had spent below

Rs.500 and above Rs.1000 respectively. Thus, majority of the

respondents had spent Rs.500-1000 for purchase per shopping visit

in the retail shop.

- 125 -

While analyzing the sources say the persons/media through

which the respondents had come to know about the st ores, it is

shown that 53.8 percent of the sample respondents had got

introduced to the corresponding shop through their neighbours or

colleagues; the impact of advertisement was found to be much

meager. 22.2 percent and 12.7 percent had been introduced to the

shop by their relatives and friends respectively . Thus the majority

of 53.8 percent of the total respondents had got introduced to the

store through their neighbours/colleagues.

61.8 percent of the respondents had reflected their willingness

to recommend the shop to others as they were fully satisfied with

the services provided and 37 percent had agreed to some what

recommend. Also 63.3 percent had deliberately revealed that they

do not have any plan to switch over to another shop. Thus a

majority of the respondents were highly contented with their own

shopping store and had decided to continue shopping in the same

store and recommend the same to others as well.

With regard to the mode of payment, it is evident from the

table that 69.3 percent of the respondents paid by cash and the

remaining 30.7 percent had paid through credit cards. Thus majority

of the respondents made direct cash payment, as the payment by

means of credit cards had not yet become popular amongst our

shoppers, especially among the womenfolk.

- 126 -

The collected data were analyzed with the help of Statistical

Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) which involves weighted

average, correlation analysis, Chi -square test, one- way ANOVA,

t-test, factor analysis and logistic regression in order to find the

satisfaction level with regard to several variables in all the five

dimensions.

- 127 -

Chart IV.b.1

Persons accompanied for shopping

34.8

33.3

26.2

5.7

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Alone With spouse With family With friends

Persons accompanied

Perc

en

tag

e

- 128 -

Chart IV.b.2

Reason for purchase in the shop

13.3

3.5

44

31.3

6

1.5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Large variety

of products

The service

provided is

good

Reasonable

price

Good store

environment

Parking

facility

Convenient

location

Reason

Perc

en

tag

e

- 129 -

23.8

63

10

3.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Perc

en

tag

e

Once Twice Thrice Frequently

No. of visits

Chart IV.b.3

Number of visits per month

- 130 -

Chart IV.b.4

Amount spent on purchase per visit

39

53.5

7.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Below Rs.500 Rs.500 – 1000 Above Rs.1000

Amount (in Rs.)

Perc

en

tag

e

- 131 -

Chart IV.b.5

Source through which the store was known

22.2

12.7

53.8

11.3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Rel

ativ

es

Frien

ds

Nei

ghbours /

Colle

agues

Adve

rtis

emen

ts

Source

Perc

en

tag

e

- 132 -

IV.1. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION WITH REGARD TO

TANGIBLES

The physical facilities termed as tangibles are highly

influential in deciding the satisfaction of the customers. Especially,

the new customers are easily drawn by the attractive physical

appearance of the store.

The overall customer satisfaction level in the dimension of

tangibles like, the availability of modern looking equipment and

fixtures, visually attractive physical facilities and appealing

materials etc. were ranked by finding the weighted average of each

aspect and are tabulated below.

- 133 -

Table IV.1.1

Ranks of tangibles of service quality based on

level of satisfaction of the respondents

Aspect Mean Rank

Store has modern looking equipment and fixtures 3.51 XV

Physical facilities are attractive 3.54 XIII

Materials associated are visually appealing 3.71 VIII

Store has clean, attractive and convenient physical

facilities

3.29 XVI

Layout is easier for customers to find out what they

need

3.66 XI

Layout is easier for customers to move around 3.69 IX

Decoration of this store is attractive 3.89 III

Cleanliness and tidiness are important priorities of

this store

3.82 VI

Details of the products are neatly and correctly

displayed

3.72 VII

The store atmosphere is good and welcoming 3.99 I

Overall, this departmental store environment

stimulates purchase intention

3.65 XII

It is convenient to do one -stop shopping at this store 3.95 II

After purchasing in the departmental store, there is no

feeling of regret for having shopped there

3.88 IV

The outlet is professional and competent 3.84 V

The store provides play area for children 1.99 XVII

The store provides uninterrupted power supply by

having power generators

3.52 XIV

The store provides hygienic toilets and protected

drinking water

3.68 X

- 134 -

Tangibility of the store is one of the prime areas to be treated

with utmost care to gain customers ’ satisfaction. Though many

aspects were essential the respondents had given the highest

priority to the store’s atmosphere which was expected to be good

and welcoming. Secondly they had considered one stop shopping to

be a vital need as it avoids unnecessary transport and anxiety. On

the other hand the respondents were least bothered about the

availability of play area for children, as the children could be very

well attracted and made engaged with the design, decoration and

available commodities at the shopping centre.

In order to understand the overall satisfaction level with

respect to tangibles, a score of 5 was given for the response of

strongly agree, 4 for agree, 3 for some what agree, 2 for disagree

and 1 for strongly disagree. All the scores were added and

converted into percentage score and further, these scores were rated

as follows. A score of less than 40 was rated as poor, 41-59 as

average, 60 and above as good. The following table projects the

overall satisfaction level with regard to tangibles of the

departmental stores.

- 135 -

Table IV.1.2

Overall customer satisfaction with respect to tangibles

Satisfaction Level Percentage

Average 1.2

Good 98.8

Total 100.0

It is evident from the table that out of 600 respondents, 98.8

percent were fully satisf ied with the physical facilities of the

stores, and only 1.2 percent of the respondents had average level of

satisfaction. Hence it is vivid that large majority of the respondents

were highly satisfied with the tangibles of the store.

Table IV.1.3

Satisfaction level of respondents with regard to education

In order to understand the satisfaction level based on

educational qualification of the respondents , the following cross

tabulation is given.

Education

Satisfaction Level

Average Good

N % N %

Below 10th

0 0.0 64 100.0 r = -0.042

Sig. Val.= 0.306

(P > 0.05)

Not Significant

10th

-12th

0 0.0 166 100.0

Graduate 7 2.5 269 97.5

Post graduate 0 0.0 94 100.0

- 136 -

From the table above it was observed that irrespective of their

education level nearly 100 percent satisfaction existed among the

respondents. Only 2.5 percent of the under graduate respondents

had average satisfaction. As the correlation co -efficient turned out

to be not significant, level of education and satisfaction o n account

of tangibles do not correlate, which means the two aspects do not

influence each other. All categories of respondents look for

physical facilities and that is one aspect every shop should take

care of.

Thus, irrespective of their level of education almost all kinds

of respondents were well satisfied with the location and the

physical facilities available at the departmental stores.

Table IV.1.4

Income and satisfaction level of the respondents

In order to understand the satisfaction level based on the

income of the respondents the following cross tabulation was

worked out.

Monthly Income Average Good

N % N %

Rs. 5000-10000 3 2.8 105 97.2 r = -0.072

Sig. Val.= 0.080

P > 0.05

Not significant

Rs.10,001-20,000 4 0.9 430 99.1

Rs.20,001-30,000 0 0.0 56 100.0

Above Rs. 30000 0 0.0 2 100.0

- 137 -

From the above table it is clear that income was not a factor

that could influence the satisfaction level. All levels of people were

satisfied to the same extent, except for slight variation with respect

to the lowest income level (Rs.5000-10,000), where 2.8 percent had

only average level of satisfaction. As the correlation co-efficient is

not significant (> 0.05), the income of the respondents has no

relation to the level of satisfaction.

Thus, every category of income group was satisfied with the

physical facilities.

Table IV.1.5

Satisfaction level with regard to the members accompanying for shopping

Go for shopping Average Good

N % N %

Alone 4 1.9 205 98.1 2 = 3.459

Sig. Val.= 0.082

P > 0.05

Not Significant

With spouse 3 1.5 197 98.5

With family 0 0.0 157 100.0

With friends 0 0.0 34 100.0

The table portrays the satisfaction level of the respondents

who go shopping alone or with spouse, family or friends.

Respondents who shopped with family and friends were fully

contented than those who shopped alone or with spouse, but as 2

is not significant no association can be defined between the

satisfaction level and the respondents who were accompanied by

others for shopping.

- 138 -

Table IV.1.6

Satisfaction level with respect to the gender of the respondents

Gender Average Good

N % N %

Male 3 1.3 233 98.7

2 = 0.037

Sig. Val. = 0.0848

P > 0.05

Not Significant Female 4 1.1 360 98.9

The table above depicts the satisfaction level with respect to

the gender. The satisfaction level was good irrespective of the

gender. As the 2 value was not significant, no association could

be cited to the satisfaction level with the gender of the respondents.

Thus both male and female respondents were highly satisfied with

respect to the tangibles of the store.

- 139 -

Table IV.1.7

Level of satisfaction with respect to occupation of the

respondents

Occupation of the respondents plays a vital role in deciding

their satisfaction. The following tabulation lists down the

satisfaction level of different cadre of respondents.

Occupation Average Good

N % N %

Govt. Official 0 0.0 92 100.0

2 = 17.393

Sig. Val.= 0.004

P < 0.05

Significant

Businessman 0 0.0 99 100.0

Professional 3 4.7 61 95.3

Private employee 4 3.5 109 96.5

Housewife 0 0.0 190 100.0

Others 0 0.0 42 100.0

The significant result in 2 , confirmed a strong association

between the occupation of the respondents and their level of

satisfaction. Very few respondents employed in private sectors

(3.5%) and those who had taken up professional jobs (4.7%) had

average satisfaction and the rest mainly government employees,

business men and housewives were fully sat isfied with the physical

facilities of the store.

- 140 -

Table IV.1.8

Satisfaction level with respect to reason for selecting a particular shop

Reason for selecting a shop Average Good

N % N %

Large variety of products 0 0.0 80 100.0

2 = 15.522

Sig. Val. = 0.017

P < 0.05

Significant

The service provided is good 0 0.0 21 100.0

Reasonable price 0 0.0 264 100.0

Good store environment 7 3.7 181 96.3

Parking facility 0 0.0 36 100.0

Convenient location 0 0.0 9 100.0

Others 0 0.0 2 100.0

There might be many reasons for selecting a particular

departmental store. The significant value returned by the 2

analysis, affirmed a strong association between the

expectation/satisfaction level and the various reasons for purchase.

The majority of the respondents (44%) ranked the fixing of

reasonable price to be the prime cause for selecting a particular

departmental store and 181 respondents (31%) had prioritized the

availability of good store environment to be the prime cause. Few

others preferred the availability of more choices of products (80),

convenient parking (36), convenient location (9) and good service

extended at the departmental stores (21). A few respondents (7) had

average satisfaction with regard to the store environment. On the

whole the respondents had given more weightage for reasonable

price and good store environment while selecting a particular shop.

All the respondents, whatever might be the reason stated had full

- 141 -

satisfaction towards tangibles, except for 3.7 percent of the

respondents who preferred the shop for good store environment had

only average satisfaction level.

Table IV.1.9

Frequency of purchase in a month and level of satisfaction

of the respondents

Frequency of purchase Average Good

N % N %

Once 7 4.9 136 95.1 r = 0.35

Sig. Val.= 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

Twice 0 0.0 378 100.0

Thrice 0 0.0 60 100.0

Frequently 0 0.0 10 100.0

The table above projects the satisfaction level of the

respondents with respect to their frequency of visit. From the

above correlation studies it was vivid that the frequency of

purchase had strong relation to the satisfaction level. The

respondents who purchased twice or more in a month were fully

(100%) satisfied than those who purchased only once a month as

4.9 percent of them had only average level of satisfaction.

Conversely, this can also be stated that, higher the satisfaction,

higher will be the number of visi ts as well!

- 142 -

Table IV.1.10

Satisfaction level of the respondents with regard to the amount spent

in one visit

Amount Spent Average Good

N % N %

Below Rs.500 7 3.0 227 97.0 r = 0.37

Sig. Val.= 0.003

P < 0.05

Significant

Rs.500 – 1000 0 0.0 321 100.0

Above Rs.1000 0 0.0 45 100.0

The above correlation table reflects a significant relation

between the level of satisfaction and the amount spent. The

respondents who purchased for more than Rs.500 seemed to be more

satisfied. This was because only those respondents who were

satisfied would intend to purchase more. 3 percent of the

respondents who had spent less than Rs.500 had only average

satisfaction level. Thus the level of satisfaction turned out to be

100 percent when the amount spent was greater than Rs.500 per

visit.

- 143 -

Table IV.1.11

Satisfaction level with respect to persons/media through which the

respondents got introduced to the shop

Source of

knowledge about

the shop

Average Good

N % N %

Relatives 0 0.0 133 100.0

2 = 6.074

Sig. Val.= 0.108

P > 0.05

Not Significant

Neighbours/

colleagues

7 2.2 316 97.8

Advertisements 0 0.0 68 100.0

Friends 0 0.0 76 100.0

The above table reflects the satisfaction level and the

respective sources of their knowledge about the shop. As per the

logical reasoning no association can be attributed to the dependence

of the satisfaction level with the person who introduced the shop or

the media through which they got introduced to the shop. The

satisfaction level of the respondents who had got introduced

through various means seemed to be good. The table portrays that

majority of the respondents had got introduced through their

neighbours or colleagues. As 2 is not significant, no association

could be defined between the satisfaction level and the

persons/media through which the respondents had got introduced to

the shop.

- 144 -

Table IV.1.12

Satisfaction level of respondents with regard to mode of payment

Mode of

payment

Average Good

N % N %

Cash 7 1.7 409 98.37 2= 3.133

Sig. Val. = 0.076

P > 0.05

Not significant

Credit cards 0 0 184 100.0

The above table shows the mode of payment of the

respondents. On the basis of 2 analysis no association could be

made for the satisfaction level with regard to the mode of payment

as expected logically. This revealed that almost all the respondents

were aware and highly satisfied with the physical aspects whether

they had made their payment through cash or credit cards.

Table IV.1.13

Association between the gender and their opinion to recommend

the shop to others

Gender/

Recommend

to others

Yes No

N % N % 2= 0.007

Sig. Val. = 0.502

P > 0.05

Not Significant

Male 87 36.9 149 63.1

Female 133 36.5 231 63.5

The above table shows the association between both the

gender and their opinion to recommend the shop to others. The

table reflects that no association could be stated between gender

- 145 -

and the responsibility of recommending the shop to others , as the

2 value turned out to be not significant.

Table IV.1.14

Association between educational qualification and the opinion to

recommend the shop to others

Education/

Recommend

to others

Yes No

N % N %

Below 10th

11 17.2 53 82.8 2 = 15.198

Sig. Val. = 0.002

P < 0.05

Significant

10th

-12th

70 42.2 96 57.8

Graduate 110 39.9 166 60.1


There exists a significant association between the educational

qualification and the decision to recommend the shop to others. In

spite of their educational qualification the respondents didn’t want

to take up the responsibility of recommending the shop to others.

Comparatively respondents with the educational qualification below

10th

had no strong opinion to recommend the shop to others.

- 146 -

Table IV.1.15

Association between income and the opinion to recommend

the shop to others

Monthly Income/

Recommend

to others

Yes No

N % N %

Rs.5,000-10,000 26 24.1 82 75.9 2 = 42.248

Sig. Val. = 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

Rs.10,001-20,000 191 44.0 243 56.0

Rs.20,001-30,000 3 5.4 53 94.6

Above Rs.30,000 0 0.0 2 100.0

There existed a significant association between income and

opinion to recommend. The respondents with monthly income of

Rs.10,001-20,000 (44%) had decided to recommend and majority

with the higher-income level did not wish to recommend. Thus

higher the income, the more they didn’t want to recommend .

Table IV.1.16

Association between gender and occupation of the respondents

Gen

der

/

Occ

up

ati

on

.

Govt.

Off

icia

l

Bu

sin

essm

an

Pro

fess

ion

al

Pri

va

te

emp

loy

ee

Ho

use

wif

e

Oth

ers

Male 66

(28.0%)

87

(36.9%)

27

(11.4%)

39

(16.5%)

0

(0.00%)

17

(7.2%)

2= 252.937

Sig. Val

= 0.000

P <0.05

Significant

Female 26

(7.1%)

12

(3.3%)

37

(10.2%)

74

(20.3%)

190

(52.2%)

25

(6.9)

- 147 -

From the 2 analysis the significant value obtained showed a

good association between gender and their occupation. The male

respondents mostly were businessmen (36.9%) or Government

officials (28%). On the other hand most of the female respondents

were housewives (52.2%) or employed in the private sector

(20.3%).

Table IV.1.17

Association between gender and income level of the respondents

Gender/Income

(per month)

Rs.5000-

10000

Rs.10001-

20000

Rs.20001-

30000

Above

Rs.30000

Male 29

(12.3)

192

(81.4)

15

(6.4)

0

(0.00)

2 = 16.421

Sig.Val.= 0.01

P < 0.05

Significant

Female 79

(21.7)

242

(66.5)

41

(11.3)

2

(0.5)

2 analysis shows a significant association between gender

and income range. 81.4 percent of the male respondents earned

Rs.10001-20000 and 12.3 percent earned Rs.5000-10000. On the

other hand 66.5 percent female respondents earned Rs.10001-20000,

21.7 percent earned Rs.5000-10000 and 11.3 percent earned

Rs.20001-30000. The average income of the male respondents was

more compared to that of the female respondents.

- 148 -

Table IV.1.18

Association between gender and the reason to choose the shop

Gender/

Reason

for

selecting

a shop

La

rge

va

riet

y o

f p

rod

uct

s

Ser

vic

e is

go

od

Rea

son

ab

le p

rice

Go

od

sto

re e

nv

iro

nm

ent

Pa

rkin

g f

aci

lity

Co

nv

enie

nt

lo

cati

on

Oth

ers

Male 25

(10.6%)

4

(1.7%)

123

(52.1%)

78

(33.1%)

4

(1.7%)

2

(0.8%)

0

(0.0%)

2= 26.423

Sig.Val

= 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

Female 55

(15.1%)

17

(4.1%)

141

(38.7%)

110

(30.2%)

32

(8.8%)

7

(1.9%)

2

(0.5%)

The above 2 analysis pictures a good association between

gender and the reason stated to prefer a particular shop over that of

the others. The order or priority of the reasons remains almost the

same irrespective of the gender. Both male (52.1%) and female

(38.7%) had stated reasonable price to be their primary priority,

followed by good store environment and more choice of product s.

Compared to males, females gave more importance for convenient

parking and services extended by the shop. Thus retail shops that

sold at reasonable price and had good environment attracted more

customers.

- 149 -

Table IV.1.19

Association between gender and members who accompany for shopping

Gender/Persons

accompanying for

shopping

Alo

ne

Sp

ou

se

Fa

mil

y

Fri

end

s

Male 65

(27.5%)

82

(34.7%)

77

(32.6%)

12

(5.1%)

2=12.607

Sig.Val.

= 0.006

P < 0.05

Significant

Female 144

(39.6%)

118

(32.4%)

(80)

(22.0%)

22

(6.0%)

2 analysis shows a significant association between gend er

and the members who accompanied them for shopping. 34.7

percent of the male shopped with their spouse, 32.6 percent with

their family, 27.5 percent shopped alone and 5.1 percent with

friends. With respect to females 39.6 percent shopped alone, 32.4

percent with their spouse, 22 percent with family and 6 percent with

their friends. Thus a majority of males shopped with spouse or

family and the majority of females went alone.

- 150 -

Table IV.1.20

Association between gender and the means through which they got

introduced to the shop

Gender/

Source of

knowledge about

the shop

Rel

ati

ves

Nei

gh

bo

urs

/

Co

llea

gu

es

Ad

ver

tise

men

ts

Fri

end

s

Male 52

(22.0%)

141

(59.7%)

22

(9.3%)

21

(8.9%)

2= 8.279

Sig.Val.

= 0.041

P < 0.05

Significant

Female 81

(22.3%)

182

(50.0%)

46

(12.6%)

55

(15.1%)

The above table reflects the association between gender and

by whom the respondents came to know about the shop. Males have

got introduced to the shop through neighbours/ colleagues (59.7%),

relatives (22.0%), advertisements (9.3%) and friends (8.9%). 50

percent of the female respondents had got introduced through

neighbours or colleagues, 22.3 percent through relatives, 12.6

percent through advertisements and 15.1 percent through friends.

Thus the majority of the respondents had got introduced through

neighbours or colleagues as people believe on others experience.

- 151 -

Table IV.1.21

Association between gender and mode of payment

Gender/Mode of

payment Cash Credit Cards

Male 152

(64.4%)

84

(35.6%)

2= 4.441

Sig.Val.

= 0.022

P < 0.05

Significant

Female 264

(72.5%)

100

(27.5%)

The table clearly shows that significant association prevails

between gender and mode of payment. Out of 600 respondents 152

(64.4 percent) males paid by cash and 84 of them used credit cards.

Among the female respondents 264 (72.5%) paid by cash and 100

(27.5%) of them paid through credit cards. Thus a majority of both

male and female respondents paid only by cash.

Table IV.1.22

ANOVA for satisfaction level between respondents of various age groups

Variable Age N Mean Groups Sum of

Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Age G1

G2

G3

G4

28

223

286

63

73.69

70.51

72.54

75.35

Between

groups

With in

groups

1352.69

20659.52

3

596

450.90

34.664

13.008 Sig. Val =

.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Upto 20 years G2 = 21-30 years G3 = 31- 40 years

G4= Above 40 years

- 152 -

As per the above table there is significant difference in

satisfaction level based on the various age groups with regard to

tangibles. It was observed that people in the age group of 40 and

above had higher satisfaction level compared to those of the other

age groups.

Table IV.1.23

ANOVA for satisfaction level between educational qualifications of

the respondents

Variable Education N Mean Groups Sum of

Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Educational

Qualification

G1

G2

G3

G4

64

166

276

94

74.70

71.27

72.12

71.95

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

548.75

21463.47

3

596

182.917

36.013 5.079

Sig. Val.

= 0.002

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Below 10th

G2 =10th

-12th

G3 = Graduate G4 = Post graduate

The above table reflects a significan t difference in the

satisfaction level between the respondents with various educational

qualifications. It was observed that people with qualification below

10th

standard had higher satisfaction level compared to others who

had higher educational qualification.

- 153 -

Table IV.1.24

ANOVA for satisfaction level between respondents of different occupation

Variable Occupation N Mean Groups Sum of

Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Occupation G1

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

92

99

64

113

190

42

70.65

69.25

73.58

73.55

72.71

73.59

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1532.24

20479.98

5

594

306.44

36.478 8.88

Sig. Val.

= 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1= Govt. official G2 = Businessman G3 = Professional

G4 = Private employee G5 = House wife G6 = Others

There is significant difference in the satisfaction level based

on the kind of occupation of the respondents. It was observed that

people who were professionals (mean = 73.58) and people working

in other sectors (mean = 73.59) had higher satisfaction level in the

dimension of tangibles.

- 154 -

Table IV.1.25

ANOVA for satisfaction level between various income

groups of the respondents

Variable Income N Mean Groups Sum of

Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Monthly

Income

G1

G2

G3

G4

108

434

56

2

74.21

71.22

74.97

78.82

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1371.30

20640.92

3

596

457.101

34.63

13.19

Sig. Val

= 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Rs.5000-10000 G2 = Rs.10001-20000

G3 = Rs.20001-30000 G4 = Above Rs.30000

The table depicts a significant difference in satisfaction level

between various income groups. It was observed that people who

had a monthly income above Rs.30,000 had higher satisfaction level

with regard to the physical facilities compared to those of the other

income groups.

- 155 -

Table IV.1.26

ANOVA for satisfaction level between number of members in the family

Variabl

e

No. of

family

member

s

N Mea

n

Groups Sum of

Squares

df Mean

Squar

e

F

No. of

member

s

G1

G2

G73

34

9

24

2

9

71.91

72.34

75.29

Betwee

n

Groups

With in

Groups

117.505

21894.72

1

2

59

7

58.752

36.675

1.60

2

Sig. Val.

= 0.202

P > 0.05

Not

significan

t

G1 = 2 - 4 members G2 = 5 - 7 members G3 = Above 7 members

It was observed from the people who were from a large family

with more than 7 members had higher level of satisfaction with

respect to the aspect of tangibles compared to members hailing

from a small family. But as the result of ANOVA was not

significant, there was no difference in satisfaction level based on

the number of members in the family.

Table IV.1.27

ANOVA for satisfaction level between the respondents who were

accompanied for shopping by different people

Variable Persons

accompanied

N Mean Groups Sum of

Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Often go

for

shopping

G1

G2

G3

G4

209

200

157

34

70.86

73.12

71.59

76.60

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1260.892

20751.334

3

596

420.297

34.818 12.071

Sig. Val.

= 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

- 156 -

G1= Alone G2 = With spouse G3 = With family G4 =With friends

- 157 -

From the above table there is significant difference in

satisfaction level based on the persons who accompanied the

respondents for shopping. It was observed that people who were

accompanied for shopping by their friends had higher satisfaction

level.

Table IV.1.28

ANOVA for satisfaction level between the respondents reason

for selecting a particular shop

Variabl

e

Reason

for

purchas

e

N Mea

n

Groups Sum of

Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Reason

for

purchas

e

G1

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

G7

80

.21

26

4

18

8

36

9

2

73.66

72.26

73.57

69.21

71.96

77.64

72.94

Betwee

n

Groups

With in

Groups

2619.527

19392.69

9

6

59

3

436.58

8

32.703

13.35

0

Sig.Val.

= 0.000

P < 0.05

Significan

t

G1 = Large variety of products G2 = The service provided is good

G3 = Reasonable price G4 = Good store environment

G5 = Parking facility G6 = Convenient location

G7 = Others

The above table reflects a significant difference in the

satisfaction level between the reasons for selecting a particular

shop for purchase. The satisfaction level with regard to tangibles

- 158 -

was high for the respondents who had selected the shop for

convenient location than those with various other reasons.

- 159 -

Table IV.1.29

ANOVA for satisfaction level between the respondents

frequency of purchase

Variable Frequency

of

purchase


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Frequency

of

purchase

G1

G2

G3

G4

143

378

60

19

70.64

72.32

74.82

71.086

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

785.901

21226.325

3

596

261.997

35.615

7.356

Sig. Val. =

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Once G2 = Twice G3 = Thrice G4 = Frequently

There exists a significant difference in the satisfaction l evel

based on the frequency of purchase. It was observed that people

who had gone for purchase thrice a month had higher level of

satisfaction in dimension of tangibles.

Table IV.1.30

ANOVA for satisfaction level between amounts spent on

purchase by the respondents

Variable

Amount

spent


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Amount

spent on

purchase

G1

G2

G3

234

321

45

71.46

71.96

76.86

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1119.437

20892.789

2

597

559.719

34.996

15.994

Sig. Val. =

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Below Rs.500 G2 = Rs.500 - 1000 G3 = Above Rs. 1000

- 160 -

It is clear from the above table that there is significant

difference in the satisfaction level based on the amount spent on

purchase. It was observed that people who had spent more than

Rs.1000 had higher satisfaction level with regard to tangibles.

Table IV.1.31

ANOVA for satisfaction level between persons/media through which the

respondents got introduced to the shop

Variable Introduced

by


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Got

introduced

to the shop

G1

G2

G3

G4

133

323

68

76

73.92

70.91

73.49

72.97

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1081.276

20930.95

3

596

360.425

35.119 10.263

Sig. Val

= 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Relatives G2 = Neighbours/Colleagues G3 = Advertisements

G4 = Friends

As per the above table there is a significant difference in the

satisfaction level between persons/media through which the

respondents got introduced to the shop. It is evident from the table

that the respondents who had got introduced through their relatives

had high level of satisfaction level. Also those who got introduced

through advertisements had the same footing of satisfaction level.

- 161 -

Table IV.1.32

t-test for comparing satisfaction level between gender

In order to compare the tangibles satisfaction score between

two groups, independent t-test was used. The results of the

independent t- test are given below.

Gender N Mean Std.

Deviation

Std.

Error

Mean

t df Sig.

Male 236 71.4407 6.26072 0.40754 -2.24 598 0.023

Female 364 72.5889 5.89445 0.30895

From the above table the percentage score differs

significantly between genders. It reflects a h igher level of

satisfaction for the female respondents than that of the male

respondents.

Table IV.1.33

t- test for comparing satisfaction between mode of payment

Mode of

Payment

N Mean Std.

Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

t df

Cash 416 72.1295 6.05777 0.29701

-0.047 598 0.963 Credit

Cards

184 72.1547 6.08819 0.44883

From the above table it is clear that percentage score did not

differ significantly between modes of payment. Thus the

satisfaction level did not vary between respondents who paid by

cash or through credit cards.

- 162 -

Table IV.1.34

t- test comparing satisfaction level between

switching over to other shop

Opinion N Mean Std.

Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

t df

Yes 220 69.8449 4.73746 0.31940 -7.353 598 0.000

No 380 73.4644 6.34782 0.32564

The above t-test table clearly exhibits that the percentage

score differs significantly (P<0.05) between the opinion of

switching over to other shop and satisfaction level. The persons

with high satisfaction level did not have an opinion to switch over

to another shop.

Factor Analysis for the Dimension of Tangibles

In factor analysis the dimension of the var iables were reduced

to a few and are considered for the factor analysis. The results of

the factor analysis are given below.

Table IV.1.35

KMO and Bartlett’s test for Tangibles

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy 0.735

Bartlett’s Test of Approx. Chi-Square

Sphericity df

Sig.

1281.079

136

0.000

- 163 -

From the above KMO and Bartlett’s test the researcher

observed that the factor analysis is an appropriate one for the data

chosen, namely for the physical facilities .

Table IV.1.36

Rotated Component Matrix for Tangibles

Aspect f1 f2 f3 f4 f5 f6 f7

Store is looking modern 0.693 0.098 -0.049 -0.064 0.023 0.059 -0.022

Physical facilities are

attractive

0.718 -0.117 0.071 0.096 0.103 0.186 -0.119

Materials associated are

visually appealing

0.225 0.238 0.209 -0.253 0.492 -0.123 0.182

Store has clean, attractive and

convenient physical facilities

0.302 0.255 0.263 0.154 0.214 -0.023 -0.019

Layout is easier for customers

to find out what they need

0.264 0.582 0.017 0.324 0.021 0.208 0.065

Layout is easier for customers

to move around

0.308 0.576 0.145 0.077 -0.280 -0.372 -0.116

Decoration of this store

attracts to do shopping there.

-0.035 -0.243 0.393 0.545 0.091 0.034 -0.331

Cleanliness and tidiness are

important priorities of this

store

0.149 0.053 0.149 0.465 0.417 -0.071 0.127

Details of the products are

neatly and correctly displayed

0.277 -0.154 0.612 0.044 -0.070 -0.281 -0.039

Departmental store

atmosphere is good and

welcoming

0.015 -0.014 -0.108 0.075 0.839 0.015 -0.102

Overall the departmental store

environment can stimulate

purchase intention

-0.143 0.764 -0.045 -0.174 0.169 0.130 -0.063

It is convenient to do one stop

shopping at this store

-0.092 -0.099 -0.009 0.104 -0.001 0.041 0.898

After purchasing, there is no

feeling of regret for having

shopped there.

-0.053 0.078 -0.064 -0.762 -0.070 -0.040 0.092

The outlet is considered

professional and competent.

0.033 0.040 -0.618 0.394 0.172 -0.379 0.061

The store provides play area

for children.

0.254 0.137 -0.024 -0.031 -0.071 0.838 0.019

The store provides

uninterrupted power supply by

having power generators.

0.533 0.263 0.312 -0.140 0.044 -0.085 0.372

The store provides hygienic

toilets protected drinking

water.

-0.086 0.352 0.639 0.332 0.173 0.027 0.133

Eigen value 2.639 1.710 1.453 1.261 1.186 1.180 1.071

% of Variance 10.553 10.073 9.411 9.293 8.055 7.027 6.951

- 164 -

From the above rotated component matrix the primary factor

consisting of the variables such as modern looking store, physical

facilities and uninterrupted power supply which together accounts

for 10.55 percent of variance. Therefore this factor (f1 ), could be

labeled as attractive and convenient physical facilities. The second

factor consisting of variables such as easier layout, easier to move

around, and the overall store environment which together accounts

for 10.07 percent of variance. This factor (f2) can be labeled as

store environment factor. Factor three consisting of the variables

like proper display of products and the availability of hygienic

toilets and protected drinking water together accounts for 9.41

percent of the variance and could be labeled as professional

competency of the store. The fourth factor consisting o f the

variable, decoration of the store, accounts for 9.29 percent of

variance. The atmosphere being good and welcoming constitutes the

fifth factor and accounts for 8.05 percent of variance. The sixth

factor consisting of the variable availability of play area for

children, accounts for 7.02 percent of variance. One -stop shopping

is the seventh factor which accounts for 6.95 percent of variance.

Logistic Regression

Logistic Regression is used when the response variable is

binary. For example in a binary value 1 and 0, 1 may represent

success, 0 may represent failure. In this study 1 represents good

level of satisfaction and 0 represent s poor level of satisfaction.

Here in the dimension of tangibles, a percentage score of 80 and

- 165 -

above was taken as good level of satisfaction. (1), while a score of

below 80 was taken to be poor satisfaction level (0). The

independent variables considered in the analysis were age, sex,

occupation, income, family size, frequency of shopping and

preference for the shop. The results of the logistic regression are

given below.

Table IV.1.37

Classification Table

Observed

Predicted

Level of tangibles Percentage

Corrected

Low

level

High

Level

Level of

tangibles

Low Level 520 9 98.3

High

Level

63 8 11.3

Overall Percentage 88.0

From the above table it is observed that logistic r egression

classifies data corrected to the extent of 88 percent reflecting high

level of satisfaction with regard to the dimension of tangibles.

- 166 -

Table IV.1.38

Variables in the Equation for Tangibles

B S.E Wald df Sig. Exp(B)

Age 0.149 0.201 0.549 1 0.459 1.161

Gender -1.163 0.347 11.260 1 0.001 0.312

Education 0.025 0.163 0.023 1 0.880 1.025

Occupation 0.504 0.124 16.399 1 0.000 1.655

Income -0.828 0.290 8.148 1 0.004 0.437

Family Size 1.191 0.256 21.724 1 0.000 3.291

Persons accompanying

for shopping

0.300 0.146 4.244 1 0.039 1.350

Preference for the shop -0.427 0.117 13.347 1 0.000 0.652

Constant -2.193 1.074 4.174 1 0.041 0.112

From the above table the variables such as gender ,

occupation, income, family size , persons accompanying for

shopping and preference for the shop were found to be significant,

which shows that these variables are deciding the satisfaction level

with regard to the dimension of tangibles.

It is seen that the family size and occupation level increases

the good level of satisfaction. As the family size and occupation

level increases the good level of satisfaction increases more than 3

times and 1.5 times respectively .

While on the other hand, gender, income level and preference

for the shop reduce the good level of satisfaction to a greater extent

which means that these variables need to be carefully attended to by

the departmental stores to increase the satisfaction level of the

customers towards physical facilities of the store.

- 167 -

IV.2. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION REGARDING

RELIABILITY

The dimension of reliability includes fulfilling the promise

and performing the right service at the right time, which is another

important concern capable of greatly perturbing the customer

satisfaction.


reliability such as availability of merchandise, low price products,

quick service, error free sales transactions etc. were ranked by

evaluating the weighted average of each aspect and are tabulated

below.

- 168 -

Table IV.2.1

Ranks of reliability of service quality based on the level of

satisfaction of the respondents

Aspect Mean Rank

Whenever the store promises to do something (such as repairs,

alteration) within a certain time, it will do so

3.58 XIII

The store extends its services at the time it promises to do so 3.57 XIV

The store reforms the service right from the first time 3.78 VI

The store has merchandise available when the customers want it 3.93 II

The store insists on error-free sales transactions and records 3.88 IV

Store receives suggestions with due respect from the customers 3.69 IX

Store provides door delivery facility on request 3.38 XVI

Customer’s properties are taken care by the stores at free of cost. 3.61 XII

No hidden prices 3.55 XV

Prices of the product offered are less than the MRP to some extent 3.96 I

Updating the prices are done by the stores at the appropriate time 3.64 X

Bills for the products are given promptly 3.73 VIII

Store has more payment counters favoring speedy disposal of

customers

3.81 V

There is no need to wait for long time to get the service 3.90 III

The overall service at this store is good 3.78 VI

The service quality of this outlet is acceptable 3.63 XI

Reliability is to be monitored very frequently as it is one of

the important aspects required to maintain the customer strength or

to attract more number of customers. While prioritizing the various

aspects of reliability the respondents had ranked first, th e offering

of the prices less than the MRP. Secondly almost majority of the

respondents were satisfied with the merchandise available when the

customers wanted. At the same time the respondents were least

- 169 -

worried about the hidden prices or the availabilit y of door delivery

facility.

The overall satisfaction level with respect to the dimension of

reliability was worked out following a similar scoring scheme as

explained in the dimension of tangibles.

Table IV.2.2

Overall customer satisfaction in the dimension of reliability


Average 0.3

Good 99.7

Total 100.0

The above table reflects the overall satisfaction level of the

respondents with respect to the dimension of reliability of

departmental stores. It is clearly exhibited from the table that out of

600 respondents, 99.7 percent of the respondents were fully

satisfied and only 0.3 percent of the respondents had average level

of satisfaction. Hence a large majority of the total respondents were

highly satisfied with the dimension of reliability.

- 170 -

Table IV.2.3


The table below portrays the variation of satisfaction level

with regard to reliability between the respondents with various

levels of education.

Education Average Good

N % N %

Below 10th

std. 0 0.0 64 100.0

r = -0.022

Sig. Val.= 0.586

P > 0.05

Not significant

10th

-12th

std. 0 0.0 166 100.0

Graduate 2 0.7 274 99.3


It is evident from the above table that irrespective of the

education level, 100 percent satisfaction prevailed among the

respondents. Only 0.7 percent of the undergraduate respondents had

average satisfaction. As the correlation co -efficient turned out to be

not significant, no relation could be stated b etween the level of

education and satisfaction on account of reliability.

Thus irrespective of the education level many were satisfied

with regard to reliability and no explicit relation can be stated

between the satisfaction level and level of education of the

respondents.

- 171 -

Table IV.2.4

Satisfaction level of the respondents with regard to income

Monthly Income Average Good

N % N %

Rs.5,000-10,000 2 1.9 106 98.1 r = 0.101

Sig. Val.= 0.014

P < 0.05

Significant

Rs.10,001-20,000 0 0.0 434 100.0

Rs.20,001-30,000 0 0 56 100.0

Above Rs.30,000 0 0 2 100.0

The income is possibly a prime factor in deciding the

satisfaction level with regard to the dimension of reliability, as the

natural tendency of higher income group is to purchase higher

quality products which ultimately may be a more reliable one. From

the table it was observed that there was a significant relation

between income and the satisfaction level of the customers. There

existed a direct proportionality between the monthly income and the

satisfaction level. The lowest income groups had considerably

lesser satisfaction than those who had higher income. 1.9 per cent

of the respondents with monthly income between Rs . 5,000 and

Rs. 10,000 had average satisfaction level, whereas the responden ts

with monthly income greater than Rs.10,000 had 100 percent

satisfaction with regard to reliability. Thus except the lower income

group the other income groups were fully satisfied.

- 172 -

Table IV.2.5

Satisfaction level with regard to the members accompanyi ng for

shopping


N % N %

Alone 0 0.0 209 100.0 2 = 33.405

Sig. Val.= 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

With spouse 0 0.0 200 100.0

With family 0 0.0 157 100.0


The 2 analysis returning a significant value, reveals that the

satisfaction level is dependent on the members accompanying for

shopping, depending upon how the shop caters to the need of the

members accompanied too. Respondents who shopped alone or with

spouse or family were fully satisfied (100%), whereas only 94.1

percent of the members, who shopped with their friends, had high

level of satisfaction. Thus except a few respondents who shop ped

with their friends others who shopped alone, with spouse or with

family were highly contented with respect to the dimension of

reliability.

Table IV.2.6


Gender Average Good

N % N %

Male 2 0.8 234 99.2 2 = 3.095

Sig. Value = 0.079

P > 0.05

Not significant

Female 0 0.0 364 100.0

- 173 -

The above table is worked out to determine the association

between the satisfaction level and gender with regard to the

dimension of reliability. Out of 600 respondents , 99.2 percent (234)

of the male respondents and 100 percent (364) of the female

respondents, had higher satisfaction level. The 2 value turned out

to be not significant. Thus both the genders were satisfied and no

association could be defined to the satisfaction level with the

gender of the respondents.

Table IV.2.7

Satisfaction level with respect to occupation of the respondents


N % N %


2 = 16.806

Sig. value= 0.05

P < 0.05

Significant




Housewife 0 0.0 190 100.0

Others 0 0.0 42 100.0

The significant value returned by 2

analysis confirmed a

strong association between the occupation of the respondents and

their satisfaction level. With regard to reliability, except the

respondents who had taken professional jobs, all the others with

varied occupation listed in the table were fully satisfied. The table

data prompts that only 3.1 percent of the professional people had

average satisfaction.

- 174 -

Table IV.2.8

Satisfaction level with respect to reason for

selecting a particular shop

Reason for selecting

a shop

Average Good

N % N %


2 = 4.398

Sig.Val = 0.623

P > 0.05

Not significant






Others 0 0.0 2 100.0

The above table reflects the satisfaction level with regard to

reliability among the respondents who had chosen the retail shop

for specific reasons. Almost all the respondents had a higher level

of satisfaction with respect to reliability. As the 2 value turned

out to be not significant, the satisfaction level of the respondents

was not dependent on the primary reason for selecting a particular

retail shop.

- 175 -

Table IV.2.9

Satisfaction level with respect to frequency of

purchase in a month

Frequency of purchase in a

month

Average Good

N % N %

Once 0 0.0 143 100.0 r = -0.006

Sig. Val.= 0.876

P > 0.05

Not significant

Twice 2 5.0 378 99.5

Thrice 0 0.0 60 100.0


The table portrays the satisfaction level of respondents with

regard to the aspect of reliability between the respondents who shop

with different frequency. Out of the total respondents only a few

(5%) respondents who shopped twice had the average level of

satisfaction. As correlation co-efficient turned out to be not

significant no relation could be drawn between satisfaction level

and the frequency of purchase in a month by the respondents.

Table IV.2.10

Satisfaction level of the respondents with regard to the

amount spent in one visit


N % N %

Below Rs.500 2 0.9 232 99.1 r = 0.666

Sig. Val.= 0.109

P > 0.05

Not significant

Rs.500 – 1000 0 0.0 321 100.0

Above Rs.1000 0 0.0 45 100.0

- 176 -

The above table reflects the satisfaction level of the

respondents with regard to the amount spent. Those respondents

who had spent more than Rs.500 had higher satisfaction level and

only 0.9 percent of the respondents who had spent less than Rs.500

had average level of satisfaction. The correlation analysis makes it

vivid that no relation can be traced between the satisfaction level

and the amount spent in a week with regard to the dimension of

reliability.

Table IV.2.11

Satisfaction level with respect to persons/media th rough which

the respondents got introduced to the shop

Source of knowledge

about the shop

Average Good

N % N %

Relatives 0 0.0 133 100.0

2 = 15.699

Sig.Val = 0.346

P > 0.05

Not significant

Neighbours/

Colleagues

0 0.0 323 100.0


Friends 0 0.0 76 100.0

The above table was worked out to study the satisfaction level

of respondents who got introduced to the shop through various

means with respect to reliability. Those who got introduced through

relatives, neighbours/colleagues and friends had 100 percent

satisfaction, whereas out of 68 respondents, who came to know

about the shop through advertisements 66 (97.1%) were fully

satisfied and only 2 respondents (2.9 %), had average satisfaction

- 177 -

with regard to the dimension of reliability. As the 2 value turned

out to be not significant, no explicit association could be defined

between the satisfaction level of the respondents and the source

through which they got introduced to the shop.

Table IV.2.12

Satisfaction level of the respondents with regard to

mode of payment

Mode of payment Average Good

N % N %

Cash 2 0.5 414 99.5 2= 0.888

Sig.Val = 0.346

P > 0.05

Not significant

Credit cards 0 0.0 184 100.0


respondents whose mode of payment is through cash or through

credit cards. Except 2 of the respondents who paid by cash , all the

respondents were fully satisfied with the aspect of reliability. From

the 2 analysis, as the significant value is greater than 0.05, no

association can be made for the satisfaction level with the mode of

payment. Thus mode of payment did not influence the satisfaction

level of the respondents.

- 178 -

Table IV.2.13

ANOVA for Satisfaction level between respondents of

various age groups


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Age G1

G2

G3

G4

28

223

286

63

71.91

72.33

75.66

75.47

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1639.16

21185.941

3

596

546.387

35.547

15.371

Sig.

value=

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Upto 20 years G2 = 21-30 years G3 = 31- 40 years G4 = Above 40 years

The above ANOVA table reflects the satisfaction level

between various age groups of the respondents. Since the above

table shows that P is less than 0.05, there is a significant difference

with regard to the satisfaction level based on the age groups. The

respondents who were of 31 to 40 years and above 40 years by age

were highly satisfied with the dimension of reliability, thus put

together it can be quoted respondents of age above 30 years were

highly satisfied.

Table IV.2.14

ANOVA for satisfaction level between educational qualifications

of the respondents


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Educational

Qualification

G1

G2

G3

G4

64

166

276

94

74.29

73.83

74.66

73.60

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

116.624

22708.478

3

596

38.875

38.101

1.020

Sig. val=

0.383

P > 0.05

Not

significant

G1 = Below 10th

G2 = 10th

-12th


- 179 -

The above table was devised to work out the difference in

satisfaction level within respondents with varying educational

qualifications. As the ANOVA test reflects to be not significant no

difference in satisfaction level could be explained with the

variation in educational qualification of the respondents.

Table IV.2.15

ANOVA for satisfaction level between respondents

of different occupation


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Occupation G1

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

92

99

64

113

190

42

72.14

71.54

77.10

76.61

74.69

72.00

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

2517.876

20307.225

5

594

503.575

34.187

14.73

Sig. val=

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Government Official G2 = Businessman G3 = Professional


The occupation undertaken by the respondents may put forth a

level of expectation with regard to the reliability, which each and

every shop may or may not satisfy. The above table shows that

there is significant difference in the satisfaction l evel of the

respondents based on their level of occupation that they undertake.

It also reveals that the respondents who were professionals (mean =

77.10) and private employees (mean = 76.61) were highly satisfied

with respect to the dimension of reliabili ty.

- 180 -

Table IV.2.16

ANOVA for satisfaction level between various income

groups of the respondents


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Monthly

Income

G1

G2

G3

G4

108

434

56

2

74.84

73.61

77.72

76.25

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

895.767

21929.334

3

596

298.589

36.794

8.115

Sig. val=

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1= Rs.5,000-10,000 G2 = Rs.10,001-20,000

G3 = Rs.20,001-30,000 G4 = Above Rs.30,000

The above ANOVA table portrays a significant difference in

the satisfaction level between the various income groups. It reflects

that the higher level income groups say those with a monthly

income between Rs.20,001-30,000 (mean = 77.72) and above

Rs.30,000 (mean = 76.25) had higher satisfaction. Hence the higher

monthly income group (Above Rs.20,000) were highly satisfied

with the dimension of reliability.

Table IV.2.17

ANOVA for satisfaction level between number of members in the family

Variable No. of family

members


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

No of

family

members

G1

G2

G3

349

242

9

74.09

74.23

79.58

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

264.745

22560.356

2

597

132.373

37.790

3.503

Sig. valu=

0.031

P < 0.05

Significant

G1= 2 - 4 members G2 = 5 - 7 members G3 = Above 7 members

- 181 -

The above table shows a significant difference in satisfaction

level in the aspect of reliability based on the number of members in

the family. It was vivid that respondents from a large family with

more than 7 members had higher level of satisfaction with respect

to reliability than those from a small family.

Table IV.2.18


accompanied by different people for shopping

Variable Persons

Accompanied


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Often go for

shopping

G1

G2

G3

G4

209

200

157

34

73.67

75.43

73.23

75.14

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

540.055

22825.102

3

596

180.018

37.391

4.814

Sig. Val=

0.003

P < 0.05

Significant


From the above table there is s ignificant difference in the

satisfaction level based on the persons accompanied for shopping

with respect to the dimension of reliability. The respondents those

who shopped with their spouse (mean = 75.43) and with their

friends (mean = 75.14) were highly satisfied compared to those who

shopped alone and with their family with regard to the dimension of

reliability.

- 182 -

Table IV.2.19

ANOVA for satisfaction level between the respondents reason


Variable Reason for

selecting a

shop


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Reason for

selecting a

shop

G1

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

G7

80

.21

264

188

36

9

2

75.14

75.11

75.30

72.00

74.20

78.75

76.25

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1507.196

21317.906

6

593

251.199

35.949

6.988

Sig. Val=

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant




G7 = Others

The above ANOVA test was performed to learn the

satisfaction level of the respondents with different reasons for

selecting a particular shop with respect to the dimension of

reliability. The above table clearly shows a significant difference in

the satisfaction level and the respondents who had selected the shop

for convenient location were highly satisfied with the dimension of

reliability.

- 183 -

Table IV.2.20



Variable Frequency of

purchase


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Frequency of

purchase

G1

G2

G3

G4

143

378

60

19

71.77

74.34

78.47

77.10

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

2107.368

20717.73

3

596

702.456

34.761

20.208

Sig. Val=

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant


The table clearly shows that there is significant difference in

the satisfaction level based on frequency of shopping with respect

to the dimension of reliability. It was observed that people those

who shopped thrice (mean = 78.47) and frequently

(mean = 77.10) had higher level of satisfaction. Conversely we can

also state that those respondents who were highly satisfied with

reliability do shop frequently in the same shop.

Table IV.2.21

ANOVA for satisfaction level between amount spent on pur chase

Variable Amount

spent


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Amount spent

on purchase

G1

G2

G3

234

321

45

73.85

73.55

81.02

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

2259.84

20565.25

2

597

1129.92

34.44

32.80 Sig. Val=

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Below Rs.500 G2 = Rs.500-1000 G3 = Above Rs. 1000

The above table pictures that there is significant difference in

the satisfaction level of the respondents based on the amount spent

- 184 -

for purchase per visit in the dimension of reliability. It wa s

observed that people who purchased for more than Rs.1000 (mean =

81.02) per visit had higher level of satisfaction in the dimension of

reliability.

Table IV.2.22

ANOVA for satisfaction level between persons/media through

which the respondents got introduced to the shop

Variable Introduced

by


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Got introduced

to the shop

G1

G2

G3

G4

133

323

68

76

75.23

73.53

74.90

74.83

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

350.245

22474.85

3

596

116.748

37.709

3.096

Sig. Val=

0.026

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Relatives G2 = Neighbours/Colleagues G3 = Advertisements G4 = Friends

From the above table there is significant difference in the

satisfaction level between the respondents who had known the shop

through various means in the dimension of reliability. It is observed

that the respondents who had come to know about the shop through

their relatives (mean = 75.23) and through advertisements (mean =

74.90) had high level of satisfaction. Also those who got

introduced through friends (mean = 74.80) had similar level of

satisfaction.

- 185 -

Table IV.2.23

t– test for comparing satisfaction level between gender

Gender N Mean Std.

Deviation

Std.

Error

Mean

t df

Male 236 73.1250 6.54922 0.42632 -3.569 598 Sig.

Val=0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

Female 364 74.9485 5.81376 0.30472 -3.480 458.920

From the above table, percentage score differs significantly

between genders. It reflects a higher percentage level of

satisfaction for the female respondents than male, and the deviation

in opinion was less for the data responded by females.

Table IV.2.24

t - test for comparing satisfaction level between mode of

payment

Mode of

Payment

N Mean Std.

Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

t df

Cash 416 73.9934 6.01305 0.29481 -1.420 598 Sig.

Val=0.156

P > 0.05

Not significant

Credit

Cards

184 74.7690 6.50486 0.47954 -1.378 348.863

The above table clearly shows that the percentage score did

not differ significantly between the modes of payment with regard

to the dimension of reliability. Thus, mode of payment remained

immaterial to decide on the satisfaction level with regard to

reliability .

- 186 -

Factor analysis for the dimension of reliability

Few variables in the dimension of reliability are considered

for the factor analysis and the results are as fo llows.

Table IV.2.25

KMO and Bartlett’s Test



Sphericity df

Sig.

1593.208

120

0.000

From the above KMO and Bartlett’s Test it is observed that the

factor analysis is appropriate for the data chosen.

- 187 -

Table IV.2.26

Rotated Component Matrix

Aspect f1 F2 f3 f4 f5 f6

Whenever this store promises to do something

(such as repairs, alteration) within a certain

time, it will do so

-0.95 0.135 -0.086 0.817 -0.084 0.089

The store extends its new services at the

time it promises to do so

-0.010 0.036 0.690 0.244 0.185 -0.030

The store reforms the service right from

the first time

-0.060 0.064 0.81 -0.27 0.773 0.191

The store has merchandise available when the

customers want it

0.534 0.024 -0.264 -0.53 0.386 0.095

The store insists on error-free sale transactions

and records

0.747 -0.043 0.133 0.119 -0.294 -0.061

Store receives suggestions with due respect

from the customers

-0.072 0.486 0.101 0.136 0.470 0.010

Store provides door delivery facility on request -0.255 0.692 -0.051 0.200 0.213 -0.032

Customer’s properties are taken care by

the stores at free of cost.

-0.059 0.662 0.317 -0.075 -0.074 0.121

No hidden prices 0.158 0.654 0.008 -0.060 -0.019 -0.065

Prices of the product offered are less than the

MRP to some extent

0.691 -0.193 -0.287 0159 0.154 -0.038

Updating the prices are done by the stores at the

appropriate time

0.015 -0.111 0.365 0.413 0.553 -0422

Bills for the products are given promptly -0.293 -0.060 0.177 0.241 0.183 0.621

Store has more payment counters favoring

speedy disposal of customers

0.166 0.012 0.077 -0.022 0.041 0.829

Need not wait for long time to get the service

that is asked for

0.171 -0.052 0.104 0.600 0.035 0.012

The overall service at this store is good 0.546 0.340 0.382 -0.069 -0.109 0.137

The service quality of this outlet is acceptable

by the customers

-0.052 0.202 0.710 -0.166 0.018 0.302

Eigen value 2.584 1.852 1.649 1.374 1.361 1.038

% of Variance 11.730 11.377 10.028 9.972 9.518 8.599

- 188 -

In the rotated component matrix, the primary factor

consisting of the variables of error free transactions, prices of the

products being less than MRP together constitutes to the good

overall service with regard to rel iability and it accounts for a

variance of 11.73 percent. The second factor consisting of the

variables of door delivery, taking care of customer’s properties and

no hidden prices which can be termed as the ease or convenience

offered by the retailers for shopping accounts for a variance of

11.38 percent. The third factor consisting of the variables of

providing new services on time and acceptable service quality

together accounts for 10.03 percent of variance. The fourth factor

consisting of variables of rendering service as promised within the

time limits and quick service without wasting the time together

which can be termed as time management accounts for variance of

9.97 percent. The fifth factor consisting of the variable of

reforming the service periodically accounts for a variance of 9.52

percent. The sixth factor consisting of the variables of more number

of payment counters favouring speedy disposal and prompt delivery

of bills can be termed as prompt billing modes which accounts for a

variance of 8.6 percent.

Logistic Regression

Logistic Regression is used for binary variables and the scale

for high level and poor satisfaction level is similar to that in the

dimension of tangibles. A percentage score of 80 and above is taken

as good level of satisfaction, (coded as 1), while a score of below

- 189 -

80 is taken to be poor satisfaction level (coded as 0). The

independent variables considered in the analysis were age, gender,


preference for the shop. The results of the logistic regression are

given below.

Table IV.2.27


Observed

Predicted

Level of reliability Percentage Corrected

Low level High Level

Level of reliability

Low Level 494 0 100.0

High Level 106 0 0


From the above table it is observed that Logistic Regression

classifies data correctly to the extent of 82.3 percent reflecting high

level of satisfaction with regard to the dimension of reliability.

- 190 -

Table IV.2.28

Variables in the Equation for Reliability


Age 0.117 0.172 0.465 1 0.495 1.124

Gender -0.508 0.279 3.299 1 0.069 0.602

Education 0.554 0.142 15.130 1 0.000 1.740

Occupation 0.293 0.093 9.8691 1 0.002 1.341

Income -0.019 0.240 0.006 1 0.936 0.981

Family Size 0.681 0.214 10.125 1 0.001 1.976


for shopping

0.186 0.123 2.281 1 0.131 1.205


Constant -3.084 0.876 18.859 1 0.000 0.022

From the above table the variables such as education,

occupation, family size and preference for the shop were found to

be significant, which shows that these variables are highly

influencing the satisfaction level with regard to the dimension of

reliability.

It is seen that the family size , education and occupation

increases the good level of satisfaction. As the family size

increases, the good level of satisfaction increases nearly 2 times.

Also as the education and occupation level of the respondents

increase, the good level of satisfaction increases slightly more and

slightly less than 1.5 times respectively.

It should be noted that the preference for shop reduces the

good level of satisfaction which demands further attention of the

departmental stores in order to increase the satisfact ion level of the

customers towards the reliability of the store.

- 191 -


RESPONSIVENESS

Although tangibles and reliability aspects of a store are well

cared for, responsiveness is yet another important key fact or which

is to be treated with utmost care to gain customers’ satisfaction, as

personal interaction has a direct influence on the satisfaction level

of the customers.

The over all customer satisfaction level in various aspects in

the dimension of responsiveness like the knowledge of the

employees to answer customers’ query, the behaviour of employees

instilling confidence in customers and customers feeling safe in

their transaction etc. were ranked by evaluating the weighted

average of each aspect and are tabulated below.

- 192 -

Table IV.3.1

Ranks of responsiveness of service quality based on the level of


Aspect Mean Rank

Employees in the store have the knowledge to answer

customer’s questions

3.38 XI

The behaviour of employees in the store instils

confidence in customers

3.81 V

Customers feel safe in their transaction with the store 3.85 III

The employees in the store give prompt service to the

customers

3.87 II

Employees in the store tell the customers about the

service exactly rendered

3.80 VI

Employees in the store are never too busy to respond to

customers request

3.82 IV

The store pays individual attention to the customers 3.65 IX

Employees in the store are consistently courteous with

customers

3.60 X

Employees answer the customers courteously while

enquiring over the telephone

3.72 VIII

Employees are readily helpful to the customers enabling

to do good shopping

4.00 I

Employees of the store are co-operative and customer

friendly

3.80 VI

It is the responsibility of the store to attend to the needs of

the customers by interacting with them as and when required. From

the above table it is clear that the respondents had first appreciated

that the employees are readily helping to facilitate good shopping

and extend prompt service. On the other hand the respondents were

- 193 -

not much bothered about the knowledge of the employees to answer

the customers’ questions or whether the employees are consistently

courteous with the customers.

Table IV.3.2

Overall customer satisfaction with respect to responsiveness


Average 0.3

Good 97.7

Total 100.0

The overall satisfaction level of the customers with regard to

responsiveness is 97.7 percent thus reflecting a majority.

Table IV.3.3


The satisfaction level based on educational qualification of

the respondents is worked out in the following cross tabulation.


N % N %

Below 10th

0 0.0 64 100.0 r = -0.022

Sig. Val.= 0.586

P > 0.05

Not significant

10th

-12th

0 0.0 166 100.0

Graduate 2 0.7 274 99.3


The above table reflects the level of satisfaction of the

respondents with regard to their educational qualification in the

dimension of responsiveness. It was observed that irrespective of

- 194 -

their education level nearly 100 percent satisfaction existed among

the respondents. Only a few (0.7%) of the undergraduate

respondents had average level of satisfaction. As the correlation co -

efficient turned out to be not significant, level of education and

satisfaction on account of responsiveness/personal interactions do

not correlate, that is the satisfaction level is not influenced by the

educational qualification of the respondents.

Table IV.3.4

Satisfaction level with regard to income of the respondents

Income Average Good

N % N %

Rs.5,000-10,000 2 1.9 106 98.1 r = 0.101

Sig. Val.= 0.014

P < 0.05

Significant

Rs.10,001-20,000 0 0.0 434 100.0

Rs.20,001-30,000 0 0 56 100.0

Above Rs.30,000 0 0 2 100.0

The expectations of the customers are highly influenced by

their standard of living. The responsiveness encountered may or

may not be satisfactory between various income groups and the

above correlation analysis was carried out to work out the same.

The outcome being significant confirmed a strong relation between

the satisfaction level on personal interaction and the monthly

income of the respondents. Respondents with an income greater

than Rs.10,000 were highly satisfied with the responsiv eness of the

shop.

- 195 -

Table IV.3.5

Satisfaction level with regard to the members

accompanying for shopping

Go for Shopping Average Good

N % N %

Alone 0 0.0 209 100.0 2 = 4.013

Sig. Val.= 0.260

P > 0.05

Not significant

With spouse 2 1.0 198 99.0

With family 0 0.0 157 100.0


Satisfaction level with regard to responsiveness is something

personal and it is an individual’s opinion which does not get altered

with the persons accompanying for shopping. However the above

table was worked out to verify the same and the non significant

value of the 2 analysis confirmed that no association could be

defined between the satisfaction level and the persons who

accompanied the respondents to do shopping.

Table IV.3.6


Gender Average Good

N % N %

Male 2 0.8 234 99.2 2 = 3.095

Sig. Val. = 0.079

P > 0.05

Not significant

Female 0 0.0 364 100.0

- 196 -

The above 2 analysis was carried out to determine the

variation of satisfaction level based on gender. Many female

respondents had reflected their opinions and there existed 100

percent satisfaction level. As the 2 analysis returned a non

significant value, no association can be made between the

satisfaction level and the gender of the respondents.

Table IV.3.7

Satisfaction level with respect to occupation of the respondents


N % N %


2 = 8.648

Sig. val.= 0.124

P > 0.05

Not significant




Housewife 0 0.0 190 100.0

Others 0 0.0 42 100.0

The responsiveness of the shop may be promising and

satisfactory to only a few respondents depending on their

occupation. The 2 analysis was done to verify the above statement

and the outcome being not significant confirmed that no association

can be defined between the satisfactory level and the occupation of

the respondents. Thus no comment can be made on the variation of

satisfaction level with occupation.

- 197 -

Table IV.3.8



Reason for selecting

A shop

Average Good

N % N %


2 = 31.438

Sig. Val. = 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant






Others 0 0.0 2 100.0

The reason for selecting a particular shop may vary from

person to person. The above table was worked out to learn the

satisfaction level among the respondents who had selected the shop

for various reasons. The significant value of the 2 analysis shows a

strong association between the satisfaction level and the reason for

selecting a particular shop. Those who chose the shop due to

reasonable price, good store environment, more choices, good

service, convenient location etc. were fully satisfied with the

dimension of responsiveness. Only 5.6 percent of the respondent s

who selected the shop for convenient parking facility had average

satisfaction.

- 198 -

Table IV.3.9

Satisfaction level with regard to frequency

of purchase in a month

Frequency of purchase

in a month

Average Good

N % N %

Once 0 0.0 143 100.0 r = -0.092

Sig. Val.= -0.025

P < 0.05

Significant

Twice 0 0.0 378 100.0

Thrice 2 3.3 58 96.7


The above correlation study was carried out to work out the

relation between satisfaction level with respect to personal

interaction and the respondent’s frequency of purchase in the shop.

As the P value was less than 0.05, the satisfaction level could be

related with the frequency of purchase. The respondents who visited

the shop once, twice and frequently were fully satisfied. On the

other hand 97 percent of those who visited thrice in a month were

fully satisfied and 3 percent of them had average satisfaction level.

Table IV.3.10

Satisfaction level with regard to the amount spent in one visit

Amount spent Average Good

N % N %

Below Rs.500 2 0.9 232 99.1 r = 0.066

Sig. Val.= 0.109

P > 0.05

Not significant

Rs.500 – 1000 0 0.0 321 100.0

Above Rs.1000 0 0.0 45 100.0

- 199 -

The table shows the satisfaction level of the respondents

based on the amount spent by them per visit. As the corr elation

coefficient is not significant no relation can be drawn between the

satisfaction level and the amount spent. Hence the satisfaction level

was high irrespective of the amount spent with regard to the

dimension of responsiveness.

Table IV.3.11

Satisfaction level with respect to persons/media through which


Source of

knowledge

about the shop

Average Good

N % N %

Relatives 2 1.5 131 98.5

2 = 7.046

Sig. Val = 0.070

P > 0.05

Not significant

Neighbours/

Colleagues

0 0.0 323 100.0


Friends 0 0.0 76 100.0

The satisfaction level of the respondents who had got

introduced to the shop through various means may vary with regard

to the dimension of personal interaction. Except 1 .5 percent of

those who had got introduced to the shop through relatives, all the

rest had 100 percent satisfaction. As the 2 value is not significant,

no association can be stated as a final verdict between satisfaction

level and the persons/media who first introduced the shop to the

respondents.

- 200 -

Table IV.3.12

Satisfaction level of respondents with regard to

mode of payment

Mode of

payment

Average Good

N % N %

Cash 2 0.5 414 99.5 2= 0.888

Sig. Val. = 0.346

P > 0.05

Not significant

Credit cards 0 0.0 184 100.0

The table portrays the variation of satisfaction level with the

mode of payment. On the basis of 2 analysis no association can be

made between satisfaction level with regard to the mode of payment

by the respondents. Thus satisfaction level can’t be pictured to be

varying with the mode of payment.

Table IV.3.13


of various age groups


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Age G1

G2

G3

G4

28

223

286

63

73.83

72.84

76.91

75.35

Between

groups

With in

groups

2122.424

21833.918

3

596

707.475

36.634

18.812

Sig. value =

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Upto 20 years G2 = 21-30 years G3 = 31-40 years G4 = Above 40 years

The ANOVA studies proved that there is significant

difference in the satisfaction level based on the various age groups.

It was observed that people in the age group of 30 and above had

higher satisfaction with regard to the aspect of responsiveness

- 201 -

Table IV.3.14


of the respondents


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Educational

Qualification

G1

G2

G3

G4

64

166

276

94

73.57

74.69

75.32

76.15

Between

Groups

Within

Groups

292.998

23663.344

3

596

97.666

39.704

2.460

Sig. Val =

0.062

P > 0.05

Not

significant

G1 = Below 10th

G2 = 10th

-12th


The table reflects the satisfaction level based on educational

qualification of the respondents. At the first si ght it appears as if

the satisfaction level increases with the educational qualification of

the respondents, but as the result of the ANOVA test turned out to

be not significant, no significant difference occurs in the

satisfaction level based on responsiveness with respect to the

educational qualification.

- 202 -

Table IV.3.15




Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Occupation G1

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

92

99

64

113

190

42

73.71

74.11

77.50

75.88

74.71

76.36

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

784.292

23172.049

5

594

156.858

39.01

4.021

0.001

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Govt. Official G2 = Businessman G3 = Professional

G4 = Private employee G5 = Housewife G6 = Others

The satisfaction level of the respondents with regard to the

dimension of responsiveness can vary with the profession

undertaken. The above ANOVA result reflects a significant

difference in satisfaction level based on the profession. The

Professional persons were much satisfied with the personal

interaction at the shop than those who had undertaken other jobs.

- 203 -

Table IV.3.16

ANOVA for satisfaction level between various

income groups of the respondents


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Monthly

Income

G1

G2

G3

G4

108

434

56

2

75.69

74.59

77.95

72.72

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

617.395

23338.947

3

596

205.798

39.159

5.255

Sig. val=

0.001

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Rs.5,000-10,000 G2 = Rs.10,001-20,000 G3 = Rs. 20,001-30,000

G4 = Above Rs.30,000

The table shows a clear variation in the satisfaction level

between various income groups of the respondents with regard to

the dimension of responsiveness. The respondents whose income

ranges between Rs. 20,000/- and Rs. 30,000/- were highly satisfied

with the responsiveness, whereas those with income greater than

Rs. 30,000/- had the least satisfaction as their expectation level was

still higher than the level currently catered by the shops.

- 204 -

Table IV.3.17

ANOVA for satisfaction level between the number of members

in the family

Dimension No. of

members


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

No. of

members

G1

G2

G3

349

242

9

75.24

74.92

73.93

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

26.417

23929.925

2

597

13.208

40.084

0.330

Sig. Val =

0.719

P > 0.05

Not

significant

G1= 2 - 4 members G2 = 5 - 7 members G3 = Above 7 members

The above table shows the variation in responsiveness

satisfaction level with respect to the respondent’s family size. As

clearly shown by the outcome of ANOVA test, no significant

difference exists in satisfaction level with regard to the family size

of the respondents.

Table IV.3.18



Variable Persons

Accompanied


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Often go

for

shopping

G1

G2

G3

G4

209

200

157

34

74.80

76.80

73.36

74.86

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1070.896

22855.146

3

596

356.965

38.398

9.296

Sig. val=

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Alone G2 = With spouse G3 = With family G4 = With friends

- 205 -

When people shop with the company of others, the

satisfaction level in the perspective of responsiveness is also

accountable to the interaction extended by the store workers to the

persons accompanied too. As the ANOVA test returned a significant

output, there exists a definite variation in the satisfaction level of

the respondents based on the persons who accompanied them for

shopping. Those who shopped with their spouse were highly

contented with the interactions at the store, when compared to those

who shopped alone or with family or friends.

Table IV.3.19

ANOVA for satisfaction level between the respondents reasons


Variable Reason for

selecting a

shop


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Reason for

selecting a

shop

G1

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

G7

80

.21

264

188

36

9

2

77.24

72.81

76.42

73.46

69.74

76.36

83.63

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

2623.729

21332.612

6

593

437.288

35.974

12.156

Sig. val=

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant




G7 = Others

While analyzing the satisfaction level based on the reasons

for selecting a particular shop it is evident as P value is less than

0.05, there is significant variation in the level of satisfaction, with

respect to the reasons for selecting a particular shop. The custo mers

- 206 -

who had selected the shop for the availability of more choices of

product were highly satisfied with the aspects of responsiveness at

the shop. Next in series, were those respondents who opted for

reasonable price and convenient location were also mor e satisfied

with the dimension of responsiveness.

Table IV.3.20



Variable Frequency of

purchase


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Frequency

of purchase

G1

G2

G3

G4

143

378

60

19

72.04

76.06

75.93

76.17

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1754.815

22201.527

3

596

584.938

37.251

15.703

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant


The frequency of visit to a shop is highly dependent on th e

dimension of responsiveness, as it is the governing factor which

attracts the customers and serves to be a cause to increase the

periodicity of visit to the shop.

The outcome of the ANOVA test is in favour of the above

statement showing a signif icant difference in satisfaction level with

the frequency of visit. All the customers who shop ped more than

once were highly satisfied.

- 207 -

Table IV.3.21

ANOVA for satisfaction level between amount spent on purchase

Variable Amount

spent on

purchase


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Amount

spent on

purchase

G1

G2

G3

234

321

45

75.23

74.13

81.21

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1982.788

21973.554

2

597

991.394

36.801

26.935

Sig. val=

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Below Rs.500 G2 = Rs.500-1000 G3 = Above Rs. 1000

The above table was worked out to measure the satisfaction

level based on the amount spent on purchase. The significant value

confirmed a strong relation between the satisfaction and the amount

spent per visit on purchase. The respondents who had spent more

than Rs. 1000 were much satisfied than those who had spent less.

Table IV.3.22



Variable Persons who

introduced the

shop


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Got

introduced to

the shop

G1

G2

G3

G4

133

323

68

76

76.30

74.56

73.66

76.53

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

583.805

23372.537

3

596

194.602

39.216

4.962

Sig. val=

0.002

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Relatives G2 = Neighbours/Colleagues G3 = Advertisements G4 = Friends

The above table portrays the satisfaction level among the

respondents based on the source through which they got introduced

to the shop. Persons do advocate a shop if and only if they were

- 208 -

highly satisfied with the dimension of responsiveness. Thus as per

the significant variation in the ANOVA test also, those who got

introduced to the shop by their relatives and friends were highly

satisfied with the aspect of responsiveness. As the relatives and

friends recommend a shop to a person knowing his likes and

dislikes, the customers who got introduced through relatives and

friends were highly contented than those who got introduced

through advertisements and neighbours.

Table IV.3.23

t - test for comparing satisfaction level between gender

As a means to compare the satisfaction score of responsiveness between two

groups independent t - test was used. The results of the tests are as follows:

Gender N Mean Std.

Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

t df Sig.

Male 236 73.1250 6.54922 0.42632 -3.569 0.598 Sig.Val.= 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

Female 364 74.9455 5.38490 0.30472 -3.480 458.920

The above table shows that the percentage score differs

significantly between genders. The female respondents had higher

level of satisfaction with respect to the responsiveness than the

male respondents.

- 209 -

Table IV.3.24

t-test for comparing satisfaction level between the mode of payment

Mode of

Payment

N Mean Std.

Deviation

Std.

Error

Mean

t df

Cash 416 74.5892 6.33856 0.31077 -2.977 598 Sig.Val.= 0.003

P < 0.05

Significant

Credit

Cards

184 76.2451 6.15508 0.45376 -3.011 360.015

It is evident from the above table that the percentage score

differs significantly between the mode of payment. The respondents

who made their payment through credit cards (mean = 76.24) were

highly satisfied with regard to responsiveness than those who paid

by cash .

Table IV.3.25

t-test for comparing satisfaction level between

switching over to other shop

Opinion N Mean Std.

Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

t df

Yes 220 75.1157 4.19416 0.28277 0.28277 598 Sig.Val.= 0.956

P > 0.05

Not significant No 380 75.0861 7.28315 0.37362 0.37362 597.989

The respondents whose level of satisfaction was less tend to

switch over to another shop. Thus to study the satisfaction level of

the respondents based on their opinion to switch over to anothe r

shop, the t-test was performed. As the result was not significant, no

definite dependence of satisfaction level on personal inter action can

be quoted with the respondent’s opinion to switch over.

- 210 -

Factor Analysis for the Dimension of Responsiveness

In factor analysis the dimension of the variables were reduced

to few and are considered for the factor analysis. The results of the

factor analysis are as follows.

Table IV.3.26




Sphericity df

Sig.

548.453

55

0.000

The above test was carried out to verify whethe r factor

analysis is appropriate for the data under the dimension of

responsiveness.

- 211 -

Table IV.3.27


Aspect f1 f2 f3 f4

Employees in the store have the knowledge to

answer customer’s questions

0.050 .573 .463 .187

The behavior of employees in the store instills

confidence in customers

0.539 s-.011 .114 .029

Customers feel safe in their transaction with the

store

0.735 .054 -.412 -.038

The employees in the store give prompt service

to the customers

-0.006 .080 .718 -.055

Employees in the store tell the customers about

the service exactly rendered

0.001 -.177 .189 .787

Employees in the store are never too busy to

respond to customers request

-0.363 .098 .-253 .405

The store pays individual attention to the

customers

.585 .380 .281 -.092

Employees in the store are consistently

courteous with customers

.210 .683 -.068 .081

Employees in the store answer the customers

courteously while enquiring over the telephone

.421 -135 .542 .018

Employees are readily helpful to the customers

enabling to do good shopping

.256 -637 .021 .283

Employees of the store are co-operative and

customer friendly

.051 .381 -.346 .546

Eigen value 1.918 1.497 1.295 1.173

% of Variance 14.516 14.168 13.727 11.074

- 212 -

The first factor in the above matrix consisting of variables of

safe transaction with the store, providing individual attention and

receptive behavior of employees together can be termed as safe and

friendly transaction accounts for a variance of 14.52 percent. The

second factor consisting of variables of courteous nature of

employees and employees being knowledgeable to give satisfactory

response to the queries posed by the customers together can be

termed as patient and apt response to the customers which accounts

for the variance of 14.17 percent. The variables of rendering prompt

service to the customers and courteous response to phone calls of

the third factor accounts for a variance of 13.72 percent. The fourth

factor consisting of the variable of explaining the actual services

rendered accounts for a variance of 11.07 percent.

Logistic Regression

Logistic Regression used for binary variables and the scale

for high level and poor satisfaction level is similar to that in the

previous dimensions. A percentage score of 80 and above is taken

as good level of satisfaction. (coded as 1), while a score of below

80 is taken to be poor satisfaction level (coded as 0). The

independent variables considered in the analysis were age, gender,


preference for shop. The results of the logistic regression are given

below.

- 213 -

Table IV.3.28


Observed

Predicted

Level of responsiveness Percentage Corrected

Low level High Level

Level of

responsiveness

Low Level 460 0 100.0

High Level 140 0 0


Logistic Regression classifies data corrected to the extent of

76.7 percent reflecting low level of satisfaction with regard to the

dimension of responsiveness.

Table IV.3.29

Variables in the Equation for Responsiveness


Age 0.261 0.151 2.970 1 0.085 1.298

Gender -0.629 0.247 6.475 1 0.011 0.533

Education 0.446 0.129 11.952 1 0.001 1.562

Occupation 0.110 0.080 1.915 1 0.166 1.117

Income -0.229 0.218 1.107 1 0.293 0.795

Family Size 0.461 0.192 5.773 1 0.016 1.585


for shopping

0.072 0.112 0.418 1 0.518 1.075


Constant -2.110 0.765 7.068 1 0.006 0.121

- 214 -

From the table above, it can be evinced that the vari ables

significant in influencing the satisfaction level regarding the

responsiveness of the shop are gender, education, family size and

preference for the shop.

As the education level and family size increase , the good

level of satisfaction increases slightly more than 1.5 times.

Gender and preference for the shop reduce the good level of

satisfaction. The gender decreases the satisfaction level to a larger

extent and keen interest should be taken by the departmental stores

to trace out the reasons for the decrease in satisfaction level.

- 215 -


ASSURANCE

The satisfaction level of the customers is manifested to a

larger extent depending on how the store solves the problems

encountered by the customers. The store should take utmost care to

solve any inconvenience faced by the customers, take up their

suggestions and cater to their needs on time. Any improper handling

of a problem may lead to earn the dissatisfaction of the customers

and the store would loose its name and fame.


assurance like meeting the needs and taking keen interest in solving

the problems of the customers, the efficiency of cashier in billing,

entertaining return and exchange of commodities, capability of the

employees to handle customer’s complaints etc. were ranked by

finding the weighted average of each aspect and are tabulated

below.

- 216 -

Table IV.4.1

Ranks of assurance of service quality based on the level of


Aspect Mean Rank

The store willingly entertains return and exchange of

commodities

3.35 VII

Whenever the customer has a problem, the store shows sincere

interest in solving it

3.67 V

Employees of the store are able to handle customer’s complaints

directly and immediately

3.52 VI

Goods/products are easily exchangeable if defects are found in

the quality

3.81 IV

The cashier is really efficient in dealing with the payment at the

counter

3.92 I

Billing and checking out is fast at this store 3.92 I

The service provided by the store meets with the needs 3.82 III

The satisfaction level of the customers mainly depends on

how the retail shop attends to the problems encountered by the

customers. Out of the various aspects the respondents were more

particular about the time management. and hence majority of them

had ranked, the efficiency of the cashier at the store in dealing with

the payment at the counter and consequently fast billing and

checking out in the first place. Next in priority they had pointed out

that the service provided met their needs and had expressed

satisfaction towards the easy exchange of defected goods at the

store. They had shown a smaller degree of dissatisfaction towards

- 217 -

willingness of the store to exchange and return defec t less

commodities and the ability of the employees to attend to the

problems encountered by the customers immediately. Thus the

respondents had given higher consideration to billing process,

service extended and easy exchange of defected commodities.

Table IV.4.2

Overall customer satisfaction on account of assurance


Average 7.2

Good 92.8

Total 100.0

The above table represents the overall satisfaction level with

respect to the dimension of assurance. To find out the overa ll

satisfaction for this aspect all the 5 level scores were added and

converted into percentage score. Out of 600 respondents, about 93

percent of the respondents had good satisfaction level with regard

to the aspect of assurance and 7 percent had average level of

satisfaction.

- 218 -

Table IV.4.3

Satisfaction level of respondents with respect to

educational qualification


N % N %

Below 10th

4 6.3 60 93.8 r = -0.070

Sig. Val.= 0.088

P > 0.05

Not significant

10th

-12th

2 1.2 164 98.8

Graduate 32 11.6 244 88.4


Assurance is a very important aspect which every store should

deal with care, so that it doesn’t earn the dissatisfaction of the

customers. The satisfaction level with regard to assurance may

vary with the educational qualification of the respondents and the

above correlation analysis was worked out to check the statement.

As per the table, there was a considerable increase in the number of

respondents with average satisfaction level in comparis on with

other dimensions, but no relation can be arrived between

satisfaction level in the dimension of assurance and the educational

qualification of the respondents as P is not significant.

- 219 -

Table IV.4.4

Satisfaction level of the respondents with respect to income

Income Average Good

N % N %

Rs. 5,000-10,000 6 5.6 102 94.4 r = 0.005

Sig. Val.= 0.896

P > 0.05

Not significant

Rs.10,001-20,000 34 7.8 400 92.2

Rs.20,001-30,000 3 5.4 53 94.6

Above Rs.30,000 0 0.0 2 100.0

The above correlation studies were made to know the

variation of satisfaction level based on the income of the

respondents. From the table it can be inferred that the respondents

with income greater than Rs.30,000/- had higher satisfaction level,

but as the correlation coeff icient turned out to be not significant no

relation can be stated between satisfaction level and income of the

respondents.

Table IV.4.5

Satisfaction level with respect to members



N % N %

Alone 21 10.0 188 90.0 2 = 17.278

Sig. Val.= 0.001

P < 0.05

Significant

With spouse 2 1.0 198 99.0

With family 16 10.2 141 89.8


- 220 -


respondents with regard to the members accompanying for

shopping. As the output of the analysis is significant, a definite

association can be made between the satisfaction level with regard

to the persons accompanied for shopping. I t is seen that 99 percent

of the respondents who shopped with their spouse had good

satisfaction level whereas only 88.2 percent of the respondents who

shopped with their friends had good satisfaction level. Thus

respondents who shopped with their spouse were highly satisfied

and those who shopped with friends had the least satisfaction.

Table IV.4.6

Satisfaction level of respondents with respect to gender

Gender Average Good

N % N %

Male 14 5.9 222 94.1 2 = 0.891

Sig. Val. = 0.345

P > 0.05

Not significant

Female 29 8.0 335 92.0

The above table gives the 2 analysis to learn the association

between the gender and the satisfaction level in assurance. T he

results being not significant, it has become evident that the

satisfaction level had no association with gender in the dimension

of assurance.

- 221 -

Table IV.4.7

Satisfaction level of the respondents

with respect to occupation


N % N %


2 = 26.514

Sig. Val.= 0.00

P < 0.05

Significant




Housewife 12 6.2 178 93.8

Others 0 0.0 42 100.0

Problems of the respondents with different occupation may be

solved to different levels and there exists a variation in the

satisfaction level with regard to the occupation of the respondents.

The 2 analysis shows a significant variation in the satisfacti on

level with respect to the occupation of the respondents. All the

businessmen were fully satisfied whereas only 82.6 percent of the

government officials were fully satisfied. 93.8 percent of the

housewives and professionals also had full satisfaction.

Thus the businessmen and government officials had the

highest and lowest satisfaction level respectively with regard to the

dimension of assurance.

- 222 -

Table IV.4.8

Satisfaction level of respondents with respect to reason



N % N %


2 = 29.931

Sig.Val = 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant






Others 0 0.0 2 100.0

The satisfaction level of the respondents based on the reason

for selecting a particular shop was worked out in the above 2

analysis. The P value being significant shows a definite association

between satisfaction level and the reason for selecting a particular

shop. The respondents who selected the shop for availability of

more choices of product, good service provided and convenient

location were highly satisfied with the aspects of assurance. Only

4.2 percent of the respondents who selected the shop for reasonable

price had average satisfaction level. Also 11.1 percent and 14.9

percent of the customers who selected the shop for parking facility

and good store environment respectively had average satisfaction

level in the dimension of assurance.

- 223 -

Thus except for those who selected the shop for convenient

parking and good store environment, others had a higher level of

satisfaction with regard to assurance.

Table IV.4.9

Satisfaction level of respondents with respect to frequency of

purchase in a month

Purchase

frequency

Average Good

N % N %

Once 11 7.7 132 92.3 r = 0.055

Sig. Val.= 0.178

P > 0.05

Not significant

Twice 30 7.9 348 92.1

Thrice 2 3.3 58 96.7


The above correlation study was worked out to know the

relation between satisfaction level and the frequency of purchase by

the respondents. From the above table it was vivid that those who

frequently visit the shop had 100 percent satisfaction, but as P

value is not significant no relation can be derived between

satisfaction level in assurance and the frequency of purchase.

- 224 -

Table IV.4.10

Satisfaction level of respondents on account of amount spent in

one visit


N % N %

Below Rs.500 18 7.7 216 92.3 r = 0.026

Sig. Val.= 0.642

P > 0.05

Not significant

Rs.500 – 1000 23 7.2 298 92.8

Above Rs.1000 2 4.4 43 95.6

To understand the satisfaction level with respect to the

variation in the amount spent on purchase the above correlation

study was carried out, but as P value being greater than 0.05 and

not significant no relation can be stated between the satisfaction

level and the amount spent by the respondents in their purchase.

Table IV.4.11

Satisfaction level with regard to persons/media through which


Source of knowledge

about the shop

Average Good

N % N %

Relatives 5 3.8 128 96.2 2 = 13.127

Sig.Val. = 0.004

P > 0.05

Significant

Neighbours/Colleagues 25 7.7 298 92.3


Friends 2 2.6 74 97.4

The satisfaction level of the respondents who got introduced

to the shop through several persons or media with regard to the

- 225 -

aspect of assurance was worked out in the 2 analysis. The outcome

being significant confirms the strong association between the two.

Nearly 97 percent of the respondents who got introduced to the

shop through their friends, 96.2 percent of those who got introduced

through their relatives and 92.3 percent through neighbours /

colleagues were highly satisfied. 16.2 percent of those who came

to know about the shop through the advertisements had only

average level of satisfaction. Thus persons who had taken the word

from personal experience of their friends, relatives and

neighbours/colleagues had high satisfaction in comparison to those

who had got introduced through advertisements.

Table IV.4.12

Satisfaction level of the respondents with regard to mode of

payment

Mode of

payment

Average Good

N % N %

Cash 18 4.3 398 95.7 2= 16.442

Sig. Val = 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

Credit cards 25 13.6 159 86.4


respondents with regard to the mode of payment in the dimension of

assurance. The above 2 analysis shows that 95.7 percent of the

respondents who paid by cash were highly satisfied and only 86.4

percent of those who had paid by credit cards were satisfied . Thus

- 226 -

the return of significant value in the 2 analysis confirms that the

respondents who paid by cash were more contented with regard to

assurance than those who paid by means of credit cards.

Table IV.4.13

ANOVA for satisfaction level between respondents of various

age groups


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Age G1

G2

G3

G4

28

223

286

63

69.79

72.95

75.57

75.41

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1515.845

42597.951

3

596

505.282

71.473

7.070

Sig.Val.=

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1= Upto 20 years G2 = 21-30 years G3 = 31-40 years

G4 = Above 40 years

The above ANOV test shows that there is significant

difference in the satisfaction level of assurance based on the

various age groups. It was observed that the respondents in the age

group 31years and more had higher satisfaction level whereas those

below 20 years had the least satisfaction level.

Thus the satisfaction level with respect to the aspect of

assurance varies significantly between the various age groups.

- 227 -

Table IV.4.14


of the respondents

Variable Educatio

n

N Mea

n

Group

s

Sum of

Squares

df Mean

Squar

e

F

Educational

Qualificatio

n

G1

G2

G3

G4

64

16

6

27

6

94

73.7

9

75.0

6

73.6

3

75.3

4

Betwee

n

Groups

With in

Groups

338.30

43775.49

6

3

59

6

112.66

7

73.449

1.54

5

Sig.Val.

=

0.204

P > 0.05

Not

significa

nt

G1= Below 10th

G2 =10-12th


As the ANOVA test returns a non – significant value, there is

no significant difference in satisfaction level with respect to

assurance based on the educational qualification of the respon dents.

Table IV.4.15

ANOVA for satisfaction level between respond ents


Variable Occupatio

n

N Mea

n

Group

s

Sum of

Squares

df Mean

Squar

e

F

Occupatio

n

G1

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

92

99

64

11

3

19

71.6

4

74.8

6

75.5

8

Betwee

n

Groups

With in

Groups

835.712

43278.08

4

5

59

4

167.14

2

72.859

2.29

4

Sig.Val.=

0.044

P < 0.05

significa

nt

- 228 -

0

42

74.5

6

74.5

6

75.1

8



The above test shows that there is significant difference in

satisfaction levels among the respondents with different profession.

The satisfaction level of the professionals was high with regard to

the dimension of assurance.

Table IV.4.16

ANOVA for satisfaction level between various

income groups of the respondents

Variabl

e

Incom

e

N Mea

n

Groups Sum of

Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Monthly

Income

G1

G2

G3

G4

10

8

43

4

56

2

72.72

74.16

78.36

80.00

Betwee

n

Groups

With in

Groups

1267.665

42846.13

1

3

59

6

422.55

5

71.889

5.87

8

Sig.Val.=

0.001

P < 0.05

Significan

t

G1 = Rs. 5,000-10,000 G2 = Rs.10,001-20,000

G3 = Rs. 20,001-30,000 G4 = Above Rs.30,000

The above table shows a significant difference in satisfaction

level among the various income groups. It was observed that the

respondents with monthly income above Rs. 30,000/ - had higher

- 229 -

satisfaction compared to other income groups. It was clear that as

the income increases the satisfaction level also increases.

- 230 -

Table IV.4.17

ANOVA for satisfaction level between the number of members in the family

Variable No. of

family

members


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

No of

family

members

G1

G2

G3

349

242

9

73.89

75.02

71.42

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

260.755

43853.040

2

597

130.378

73.456

1.775

Sig.Val.=0.170

P > 0.05

Not significant

G1 = 2 - 4 members G2 = 5 - 7 members G3 = Above 7 members

The return of non-significant value in the ANOVA test shows

that there is no significant difference in satisfaction level based on

the number of members in the family. Thus the sa tisfaction with

regard to the aspect of assurance was not dependent on the family

size of the respondents.

Table IV.4.18

ANOVA for satisfaction level between respondents who were


Variab

le

Persons

accompani

ed

N Mea

n

Group

s

Sum of

Squares

df Mean

Squar

e

F

Often go

for

shoppin

g

G1

G2

G3

G4

20

9

20

0

15

7

34

73.0

1

77.1

5

72.4

4

74.2

0

Betwee

n

Groups

With in

Groups

2516.99

4

41596.8

02

3

59

6

838.99

8

69.793

12.02

1

Sig.Val.=

0.00

P < 0.05

Significa

nt

G1 = Alone G2 = With spouse G3 = With family G4 = With friends

- 231 -

The above ANOVA test shows that there is a significant

variation in satisfaction level between the respondents based on the

persons accompanying them for shopping. It was found that those

who went for shopping with their spouse were highly satisfied with

the aspect of assurance. Even those who shopped with their friends

were also satisfied, in comparison with those who shopped alone or

with their family.

Table IV.4.19

ANOVA for satisfaction level between respondents based on

reason for selecting a particular shop

Variable Reason

for

purchase


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Reason

for

purchase

G1

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

G7

80

21

264

188

36

9

2

76.60

77.41

74.56

72.79

71.58

79.36

85.71

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1829.749

42284.047

6

593

304.958

71.305

4.277

Sig.Val.=0.000

P < 0.05

Significant




G7 = Others

There exists a significant difference in satisfaction level with

regard to assurance in categorizing the respondents on the basis of

- 232 -

the reason they consider for selecting a particular retail shop.

Primarily persons who prefer the shop for other reasons not listed

had the highest satisfaction level. It was found that those who had

selected the shop for convenient location and for the good service

provided at the shop had high level of satisfaction and those who

selected the shop for convenient parking facility and good store

environment had slightly lower level of satisfaction.

Table IV.4.20

ANOVA for satisfaction level between respondents based on


Variable Frequency

of

purchase


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Frequency

of

purchase

G1

G2

G3

G4

143

378

60

19

73.88

73.67

77.90

78.94

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1362.775

42751.021

3

596

454.258

71.730

6.333

Sig.Val.=0.000

P < 0.05

Significant


The ANOVA test reflects a significant variation in

satisfaction level based on the frequency of purchase by the

respondents. Those who had shopped monthly thrice or frequently

were highly satisfied with the aspect of assurance than those who

had shopped rarely say once or twice.

- 233 -

Table IV.4.21

ANOVA for satisfaction level between respondents based

on amount spent on purchase

Variable Amount

spent on

purchase


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Amount

spent on

purchase

G1

G2

G3

234

321

45

73.16

74.22

80.95

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

2296.029

41817.767

2

597

1148.015

70.047

16.389

Sig.Val.=

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1= Below Rs.500 G2= Rs.500 - 1000 G3 = Above Rs. 1000

The above ANOVA test shows that the satisfaction level

varies significantly between the respondents based on the amount

spent on shopping per visit. The respondents who had spent more

than Rs.1000/- per visit were highly satisfied.

Table IV.4.22

ANOVA for satisfaction level between persons/media

through which the respondents got introduced to the shop

Variable Got

Introduced

by


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Got

introduced

to the

shop

G1

G2

G3

G4

133

323

68

76

76.58

73.83

70.80

75.56

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1721.743

42392.052

3

596

573.914

71.128

8.069

Sig. Val.=

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1= Relatives G2 = Neighbours/Colleagues

G3 = Advertisements G4 = Friends

- 234 -

The above test clearly defines a significant variation in the

satisfaction level between the groups who had got introduced to the

shop through various means. It was seen that the respondents who

had got introduced through their relatives and friends had high

level of satisfaction with respect to the assurance aspect. Next in

order, those who got introduced by their neighbours/colleagues

were contented and those who learnt through the advertisements had

the least satisfaction level. Thus who took the verdict from the

experience of others had higher level of satisfaction than those who

got moved by the advertisements.

Table IV.4.23


Gender N Mean Std.

Deviation

Std.

Error

Mean

t df

Male 236 74.3462 9.12478 0.59397 0.73 59.8 Sig.Val=0.942

P > 0.05

Not

significant

Female 364 74.2936 8.22328 0.43102 0.72 464.304

The t - test for comparing the satisfaction level between the

genders reflected an insignificant figure proving that the

satisfaction level with regard to assurance did not vary with gender.

- 235 -

Table IV.4.24

t-test for comparing satisfaction level between mode of payment

Mode of

Payment

N Mean Std.

Deviation

Std.

Error

Mean

t df

Cash 416 75.1717 8.05806 0.39508 3.719 598 Sig

Val=0.000

P < 0.05

Significant Credit

cards

184 72.3758 9.39992 0.69297 3.505 306.996

The significant outcome from the above t-test confirms that

the satisfaction level vary depending on the mode of payment either

by cash or through credit cards. Thus the respondents who made

their payment through cash were highly satisfied with regard to the

aspect of assurance.

Table IV.4.25

t-test for comparing satisfaction level between switching over to

other shop

Opinion N Mean Std.

Deviation

Std.

Error

Mean

t df

Yes 220 72.7662 7.52909 0.50761 -3.391 598 Sig.Val=0.001

P < 0.05

Significant

No 380 75.2105 9.02457 0.46295 -3.558 524.965

The above t - test for comparing the satisfaction level

between switching over to another shop returns a significant value.

- 236 -

Those who did not want to switch over to another shop were highly

satisfied with regard to assurance.

Factor Analysis for the Dimension of Assurance

The variables were reduced to a few and are considered for

the factor analysis. The results of which are given below.

Table IV.4.26



Bartlett’s Test of Approx. Chi-Square Approx. Chi-Square

Sphericity df df

Sig. Sig.

435.706

21

0.000

The table confirms the appropriateness of factor analysis for

the data for the dimension of assurance.

- 237 -

Table IV.4.27


Aspect f1 f2 f3

The store willingly entertains return and exchange

of commodities

0.185 0.767 -0.041

Whenever the customer has a problem, the store

shows sincere interest in solving

-0.222 0.200 0.707

Employees of the store are able to handle

customers complaints directly and immediately

-0.189 0.787 0.199

Goods/products are easily exchangeable if defects

are found in the quality

0.197 -0.057 0.826

The cashier is really efficient in dealing with the

payment at the counter

0.735 0.009 -0.033

Billing and checking out is fast at this store 0.778 -0.178 0.004

The service provided by the store meets with

customers needs

0.630 0.351 0.017

Eigen value 1.705 1.558 1.070

% of Variance 24.286 20.109 17.498

The first factor of the above rotated component matrix consisting

of the variable of efficiency of cashier and hence quick billing

accounts for 24.28 percent of variance. The variables related to

employee’s efficiency in handling complaints directly and

immediately along with easy return and exchange of commodities

constitute the second factor and accounts for a variance of 20.11

percent. The third factor consisting of the variable of accepting

- 238 -

exchange of the defect goods accounts for a variance of 17.50

percent.

Logistic Regression

The independent variables and the scale for fixing the good

level and poor level of satisfaction are considered similar to the

previous dimensions and the results are tabulated below.

Table IV.4.28


Observed

Predicted

Level of assurance Percentage

Corrected

Low

level

High

Level

Level of

assurance

Low

Level

142 0 100.0

High

Level

180 0 0


Logistic Regression classifies data corrected to the extent of

70 percent reflecting low level of satisfaction with regard to the


- 239 -

Table IV.4.29

Variables in the Equation for Assurance


Age 0.413 0.145 8.121 1 0.004 1.511

Gender -0.680 0.239 8.105 1 0.004 0.507

Education 0.233 0.121 3.702 1 0.054 1.263

Occupation 0.314 0.077 16.430 1 0.000 1.369

Income 0.507 0.211 5.799 1 0.016 1.661

Family Size 0.874 0.186 22.043 1 0.000 2.396


for shopping

-0.041 0.109 0.140 1 0.708 0.960


Constant -4.364 0.763 32.683 1 0.000 0.013

It is clear from the table that the variables such as age,

gender, occupation, income and family size has turned out to be

significant, and hence would influence the satisfaction level of the

respondents in the dimension of assurance.

It is seen that the family size is highly influential in

increasing the good level of satisfaction to a large extent of about

2.4 times. Age, occupation and income also increase the good level

of satisfaction with a multiplicative factor of 1.5, 1.4 and 1.7

respectively. While the gender reduces the good level of

satisfaction and the departmental stores should take utmost care to

solve the problems and satisfy the respondents of both gender and

hence could increase the level of satisfaction pertaining to the


- 240 -

IV. 5. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION WITH REGARD TO

EMPATHY

Empathy which refers to the policies of the stores is of very

important concern and decides the overall functioning of the retail

shops. Proper design and execution of policies in accordance with

the time and season would attract more number of customers and

distinguishes one shop from the other.

The overall customer satisfaction level towards empathy like

offering and accepting of credit cards, supply of free and

complementary goods, offering of high quality merchandise and

quality bags to carry the goods, convenient operation hours etc.

were ranked by evaluating the weighted average of each aspect and

are tabulated as follows.

- 241 -

Table IV.5.1

Ranks of empathy of service quality based on the level of


Aspect Mean Rank

The store offers high quality merchandise 3.65 VIII

The store provides adequate space for vehicle

parking

3.66 VII

The store has operating hours convenient to the

customers

3.61 IX

The store accepts all major credit cards 3.82 V

The store offers its own credit card 3.89 I

The store ensures good quality bags and provides

utmost care to carry the goods home

3.88 II

The items stated in the promotion catalogue are the

same as offered by the departmental store

3.77 VI

The service quality of the outlet is satisfactory 3.83 IV

The store supplies free and complementary goods to

the customer without fail

3.88 II

Service quality is directly influenced by several aspects of the

policies undertaken by the store to attract the customers. While

ranking the various aspects, the respondents had given prior

importance for the shop offering its own credit cards. They had

considered the supply of good qual ity bags to carry the goods

purchased and the supply of free and complementary goods to the

customers without fail, to hold the second priority. Next in order

were the satisfactory service quality, acceptance of all major credit

cards, items stated in the promotion catalogue is the same as that

- 242 -

offered by the store, adequate parking space, offering of high

quality merchandise and convenient working hours.

Table IV.5.2

Over all customer satisfaction with regard to the

dimension of empathy


Average 3.2

Good 96.8

Total 100.0

About 97 percent of the respondents had good level of

satisfaction and only 3 percent had average satisfaction level with

regard to the dimension of empathy.

Table IV.5.3

Satisfaction level of respondents with respect to education


N % N %

Below 10th

0 0.0 64 100.0 r = -0.070

Sig. Val.= 0.088

P > 0.05

Not significant

10th

-12th

0 0.0 166 100.0

Graduate 19 6.9 257 93.1


The above correlation table shows the satisfaction level based

on the educational qualification of the respondents. At the first

sight except 19 (6.9%) of the graduates all others had good level of

satisfaction towards the current policies undertaken by the store,

- 243 -

but as the P value turned out to be not significant no relation can be

defined between satisfaction level and the educational qualification of the

respondents.

Table IV.5.4

Satisfaction level of respondents with respect to income

Income Average Good

N % N %

Rs.5,000-10,000 0 0.0 108 100.0 r = -0.027

Sig. Val.= 0.504

P > 0.05

Not significant

Rs.10,001-20,000 19 4.4 415 95.6

Rs.20,001-30,000 0 0.0 56 100.0

Above Rs.30,000 0 0.0 2 100.0

The above correlation analysis was carried out to learn the

satisfaction level in empathy based on the income of the

respondents. Only 19 (4%) of the respondents who had a monthly

income of Rs.10,001 – 20,000 had average satisfaction level and the

rest of the income groups were highly contented. The outcome of

the analysis being not significant prevents defining any relation

between the satisfaction level and the income of the respondents.

- 244 -

Table IV.5.5

Satisfaction level of respondents with regard to members


Often go for

shopping

Average Good

N % N %

Alone 6 7.7 193 92.3 2 = 21.792

Sig. Val.= 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

With spouse 3 1.5 197 98.5

With family 0 0.0 157 100.0


The dependence of the satisfaction level of the respondents

based on the persons accompanied for shopping was proved by the

above 2 analysis. It was seen that those who shopped with their

family and friends were totally satisfied with the policies. Nearly

99 percent of those who shopped with their spouse also had good

level of satisfaction and only around 8 percent of those who

shopped alone had average level of satisfaction.

Thus the satisfaction level varied with the respondents based

on the persons accompanied and it was found that those who

shopped with the family and friends were highly satisfied with the

policies undertaken by the shop.

- 245 -

Table IV.5.6

Satisfaction level of respondents with respect to gender

Gender Average Good

N % N %

Male 19 8.1 217 91.9 2 = 30.263

Sig. Val. = 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

Female 0 0.0 364 100.0

The above table was worked out to find out the association

between the satisfaction level in the aspect of empathy and the

gender of the respondents. As P value turned out to be significant,

there exists a significant variation in satisfaction level with regard

to the gender of the respondents. All the female respondents were

fully satisfied with the empathy and 8 percent of the male

respondents had average satisfaction level. Thus females were

more contented and satisfied with the empathy of the retail shops

rather than the males.

- 246 -

Table IV.5.7

Satisfaction level of respondents with respect to occupation

Occupation plays a vital role in deciding the satisfaction level

with regard to the empathy aspects undertaken by the departmental

shops. The following tabulation lists down the satisfaction level of

different cadre of respondents with respect to occupation.


N % N %


2 = 36.710

Sig. Val= 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant




Housewife 4 2.1 186 97.9

Others 0 0.0 42 100.0

According to the above 2 analysis it is clear that the

businessmen and professionals were highly satisfied with the

dimension of empathy. About 97.9 percent and 97.3 percent of the

housewives and respondents employed in the private sectors

respectively had good level of satisfaction. On the other hand 13

percent of the government officials had only average level of

satisfaction.

Thus businessmen and professionals were fully satisfied and

the government officials had the least satisfaction with regard to

the empathy of the stores.

- 247 -

Table IV.5.8




N % N %


2 = 15.522

Sig. Val. = 0.017

P < 0.05

Significant






Others 0 0.0 2 100.0

The significant output of the 2 analysis showed a significant

association in the satisfaction level with regard to the respondent’s

reason for selecting a particular shop. All the respondents who had

opted for the shop due to more choices of products or good services

extended or for the parking facility/ convenient location were

highly satisfied. 98 percent of those who selected for good store

environment and 94 percent who opted the shop for reasonable

price were also highly contented. Thus except 6 per cent and 2

percent of those who selected the shop for reasonable price and

good store environment respectively all the other respondents had

good level of satisfaction with regard to the dimension of empathy.

- 248 -

Table IV.5.9


frequency of purchase in a month

Purchase frequency Average Good

N % N %

Once 3 2.1 140 97.9 r = 0.022

Sig. Val.= 0.589

P > 0.05

Not significant

Twice 16 4.2 362 95.8

Thrice 0 0.0 60 100.0


The variation of satisfaction level on the basis of frequency

of visit was worked out in the above correlation analysis. It is clear

at the first sight that the respondents who shopped monthly thrice

or frequently were more satis fied than those who shopped once or

twice, but as the correlation analysis returned a non -significant

value, no relation could be arrived at between the satisfaction level

and the frequency of visit to the shop.

Table IV.5.10

Satisfaction level of respondents with regard to the

amount spent in one visit


N % N %

Below Rs.500 3 1.3 231 98.7 r = -0.047

Sig. Val.= 0.251

P > 0.05

Not significant

Rs.500 – 1000 16 5.0 305 95.0

Above Rs.1000 0 0.0 45 100.0

- 249 -

The above correlation analysis shows the relation between the

satisfaction level and the amount spent by the respondents per visit

and it cannot be defined as the output of the analysis turned out to

be not significant. Thus, though the respondents who had spent

more than Rs.1000 had voted for 100 percent satisfaction, no

definite relation can be defined to explain the satisfaction level on

the basis of amount spent by the respondents.

Table IV.5.11

Satisfaction level with respect to persons/media through which


Source of knowledge

about the shop

Average Good

N % N %

Relatives 15 11.3 118 88.7 2 = 43.222

Sig. Val.= 0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

Neighbours/Colleagues 0 0.0 323 100.0


Friends 0 0.0 76 100.0

The significant outcome from the above 2 analysis confirms

the association between the satisfaction level and persons/media

through which the respondents had got introduced to the shop. It

was found that those who got introduced to the shop through their

neighbours/colleagues or friends were totally satisfied with the

policies. Nearly 6 percent and 11 percent of the respondents who

had got introduced through the advertisements and relatives

respectively had average satisfaction level.

- 250 -

Table IV.5.12


mode of payment

Mode of

payment

Average Good

N % N %

Cash 10 2.4 406 97.6 2= 2.574

Sig. Val. = 0.109

P > 0.05

Not significant

Credit cards 9 4.9 175 95.1

The above 2 analysis shows the association between the

satisfaction level and the mode of payment. As the result is not

significant it is clear that the satisfaction level didn’t vary with

respect to the mode of payment. Thus the satisfaction level of the

respondents who paid by cash or credit cards didn’t vary with the

mode of payment.

- 251 -

Table IV.5.13

ANOVA for Satisfaction level between respondents of

various age groups


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Age G1

G2

G3

G4

28

223

286

63

76.74

74.46

75.92

76.61

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

409.094

35030.503

3

596

136.365

58.776

2.320

Sig. Val.=

0.074

P > 0.05

Not

significant

G1 = Upto 20 years G2 = 21- 30 years G3 = 31- 40 years

G4 = Above 40 years

The above ANOVA test was carried out to analyze the

variation in satisfaction level with regard to empathy between the

respondents of various age groups.

The mean value for the groups below 20 years and above 40

years was high, however the final outcome of the ANOVA test

being not significant clearly denied any variation in satisfaction

with regard to empathy between various age groups.

- 252 -

Table IV.5.14

ANOVA for satisfaction level between educational

qualifications of the respondents


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Educational

Qualification

G1

G2

G3

G4

64

166

276

94

76.14

74.91

75.26

76.73

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

242.987

35196.610

3

596

80.996

59.055

1.372

Sig. Val=

0.250

P > 0.05

Not

significant

G1= Below 10th

G2 = 10th

-12th


To understand the variation in satisfaction level between

respondents with varied educational qualification the above test was

done and the return of non-significant value confirmed that there is

no significant variation in satisfaction level with regard to empathy

between the respondents with different educational qualification.

- 253 -

Table IV.5.15

ANOVA for satisfaction level between respondents of different

occupation


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Occupation G1

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

92

99

64

113

190

42

72.97

73.80

78.50

76.73

75.18

78.77

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

2049.635

33389.961

5

594

409.927

56.212

7.293

Sig. Val. =

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant


G4 = Private employee G5 = Housewife G6 = Others

The output from the ANOVA test shows that the satisfaction

level varies significantly between the respondents based on their

occupation. The professional persons had the highest level of

satisfaction followed by the respondents who were employed in the

private sector. Next in order the housewives had slightly more

satisfaction on the empathy of the retail shops compared to the

businessmen and government officials.

Thus the professionals had the highest level of satisfaction

and the government officials had the least level of satisfaction with

regard to empathy.

- 254 -

Table IV.5.16

ANOVA for satisfaction level between various income groups

Variable Income


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Monthly

income

G1

G2

G3

G4

108

434

56

2

76.85

74.80

78.29

73.33

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

854.699

34584.898

3

596

284.900

58.028

4.910

Sig. Val. =

0.002

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Rs. 5,000 – 10,000 G2 = Rs. 10,001- 20,000

G3 = Rs. 20,001 - 30,000 G4 = Above Rs. 30,000

The satisfaction level based on the various income groups was

studied in the above ANOVA test. It was found that the satisfaction

level varies significantly with the income of the respondents.

Those with a monthly income of Rs.20,001–30,000 had the highest

level of satisfaction followed by the Rs. 5,000–10,000 income

group. Next in series were those who had an income of Rs.10,000 –

20,000 and the highest income group with the income greater than

Rs.30,000 had the least satisfaction of all.

- 255 -

Table IV.5.17

ANOVA for satisfaction level between the number of members

in the family

Variable No. of

family

members


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

No of

family

members

G1

G2

G3

349

242

9

74.93

75.98

83.95

Between

Groups

Within

Groups

812.886

34626.71

2

597

406.443

58.001

7.007 Sig. Val. =

0.001

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = 2-4 members G2 = 5-7 members G3 = Above 7 members

The above table shows the ANOVA test for the satisfaction

level between the number of members in the family and it varies

significantly. As the number of members in the family increased,

so did the satisfaction level increase. Thus the respondents from a

large family with more than 7 members had the highest level of

satisfaction and those from a small family say 2 - 4 members had

the least satisfaction level with regard to the empathy of the retail

shops.

- 256 -

Table IV.5.18

ANOVA for satisfaction level between respondents who

were accompanied for shopping by different people

Variabl

e

Persons

accompanie

d

N Mea

n

Group

s

Sum of

Squares

df Mean

Squar

e

F

Often

go for

shoppin

g

G1

G2

G3

G4

20

9

20

0

15

7

34

73.8

7

76.0

0

76.3

7

78.3

6

Betwee

n

Groups

With in

Groups

1001.345

34438.25

1

3

59

6

333.78

2

57.782

5.77

7

Sig. Val.

= 0.001

P < 0.05

Significa

nt


The above ANOVA test shows a significant variation in the

satisfaction level between the respondents on the basis of the

persons who accompanied them for shopping. The te st revealed that

those who shopped with their friends had the highest satisfaction

level and those who shopped with their spouse and family had more

or less the same satisfaction level. The respondents who shopped

alone had the least satisfaction.

- 257 -

Table IV.5.19


reasons for selecting a particular shop

Variable Reason

for

purchase


Squares

df Mean

Square

F Significant

Reason

for

selecting

the shop

G1

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

G7

80

.21

264

188

36

9

2

78.72

71.32

75.82

73.79

76.29

78.51

75.49

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1887.052

33552.54

6

593

314.509

56.581

5.559

Sig.Val. =

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant




G7 = Others

The above table confirms the significant variation in

satisfaction level between the reasons for selecting a particular

shop. It was evident that the respondents who chose the shop for

the availability of more choices of product and convenient location

of the shop had the highest level of satisfaction. Those who opted

for the shop for convenient parking and reasonable price had almost

the same level of satisfaction and those who selected the shop for

the good service provided had the least level of satisfaction with

regard to the empathy of the retail shops.

- 258 -

Table IV.5.20



Variable Frequency

of

purchase


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Frequency

of

Purchase

G1

G2

G3

G4

143

378

60

19

73.25

75.63

78.85

78.94

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

1626.76

33812.83

3

596

542.25

56.73 9.558

Sig. Val. =

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Once G2 = Twice G3 = thrice G4 = Frequently

The above ANOVA test shows a significant variation in the

satisfaction level between the respondent’s frequencies of purchase.

It was clear that those who shopped thrice or more frequently had

higher level of satisfaction than those who shopped twice and once

monthly. Thus the satisfaction level proved to be in direct

proportion with the frequency of purchase and thus as the frequency

of visit increased, the satisfaction level also increased. Thu s those

who shopped monthly once had the least satisfaction level and those

who shopped more frequently had the highest level of satisfaction

with regard to the empathy of the retail shops.

- 259 -

Table IV.5.21

ANOVA for satisfaction level between amount spent on purchase

Variable Amount

spent on

purchase


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Amount

spent on

purchase

G1

G2

G3

234

321

45

76.21

74.12

81.53

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

23.63

33075.616

2

597

1181.990

55.403

21.334

Sig. Val. =

0.000

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Below Rs.500 G2 = Rs.500 - 1000 G3 = Above Rs.1000

The ANOVA test shows that there is significant variation in

the satisfaction level between the respondents based on the amount

spent per visit. The satisfaction level inc reased with the amount

spent. Thus those who spent above Rs.1000 had the highest level of

satisfaction followed by those who spent between Rs.500 - 1000

and the least satisfaction level for those who spent below Rs.500. It

can also be stated conversely , that more the satisfaction level the

more it stimulates the respondents to purchase, thus ultimately

increasing the amount spent on purchase. Therefore more the

amount spent more is the satisfaction level with regard to the

empathy of the shop.

- 260 -

Table IV.5.22



Variable Got

introduced

by


Squares

df Mean

Square

F

Got

introduced

to the shop

G1

G2

G3

G4

133

323

68

76

76.15

74.48

76.27

77.87

Between

Groups

With in

Groups

864.058

34575.539

3

596

288.019

58.013

4.965

Sig. Val. =

0.002

P < 0.05

Significant

G1 = Relatives G2 = Neighbours / Colleagues

G3 = Advertisements G4 = Friends

There exists a significant variation in sat isfaction level

between the respondents based on the persons/media through which

they got introduced to the shop. It was found that those who got

introduced through their friends had the highest level of

satisfaction. The respondents who got introduced through the

advertisements and relatives had almost the same level of

satisfaction and those who got introduced through their

neighbours/colleagues had the least level of satisfaction with regard

to the policies of the shop.

- 261 -

Table IV.5.23


Gender N Mean Std.

Deviation

Std.

Error

Mean

t df

Male 236 74.7646 8.79155 0.57228 -1.871 0.598 Sig.

Val.=0.062

P > 0.05

Not

significant

Female 364 75.9646 6.85746 0.35943 -1.776 415.145

The t - test for comparing the satisfaction level between

genders showed that the satisfaction level with regard to empathy

didn’t vary significantly with the gender of the respondents.

Table IV.5.24

t-test for comparing satisfaction level between

mode of payment

Mode of

Payment

N Mean Std.

Deviation

Std.

Error

Mean

t df

Cash 416 75.32 7.59008 0.37213 -0.824 598 Sig.Val=

0.410

P > 0.05

Not

Significant

Credit

Cards

184 75.88 7.92435 0.58419 -0.810 337.167

- 262 -

The non significant value of the above t -test confirmed that

the satisfaction level didn’t vary with regard to the mode of

payment. Thus the mode of payment didn’t have any influence on

the satisfaction level with regard to the empathy undertaken by the

corresponding retail shops.

Factor Analysis for the Dimension of Empathy

The results of the factor analysis, after reducing the

dimensions of the variables are given below.

Table IV.5.25




Sphericity df

Sig.

495.282

36

0.000

The appropriateness of the data chosen in the dimension of

empathy for factor analysis was checked in the table above.

- 263 -

Table IV.5.26


Aspect f1 f2 f3 f4

The store offers high quality merchandise 0.361 -0.422 0.438 0.245

The store provides adequate space for

vehicle parking

0.807 0.065 -0.228 0.106

The store has operating hours convenient to

the customers

0.706 0.144 0.287 0.005

The store accepts all major credit cards 0.549 0.054 0.264 -0.557

The store offers its own credit card 0.202 0.532 0.054 -0.021

The store ensures good quality bags and

provides utmost care to carry the goods

home

0.140 0.740 -0.106 0.197

The items stated in the promotion catalogue

are the same as offered by the departmental

store

0.124 0.040 0.177 0.829

The service quality of the outlet is

satisfactory

0.025 0.122 0.832 0.063

The store supplies free and complementary

goods to the customer without fail

-0.191 658 0.324 0.169

Eigen value 1.910 1.445 1.156 1.049

% of Variance 18.819 16.513 13.769 12.668

- 264 -

The first factor in the above rotated component matrix of the

variables consisting of convenient operating hours, adequate

parking area and accepting major credit cards together can be

termed as ease for shopping accounts for a variance of 18.82

percent. The variables consisting of stores providing its own credit

cards and providing good packing materials together constitute the

second factor and accounts for 16.51 percent of the variance. The

third factor consisting of the variable of satisfactory service quality

accounts for a variance of 13.77 percent. Availability of upto date

promotion catalogue accounts for a variance of 12.67 percent and

constitutes the last factor.

Logistic Regression

Table IV.5.27


Observed

Predicted

Level of empathy Percentage

Corrected

Low

level

High

Level

Level of

empathy

Low Level 419 0 100.0

High

Level

181 0 0.0


The logistic regression classifies data corrected to the extent

of 69.8 per cent reflecting low level of satisfaction with regard to

the dimension of empathy.

- 265 -

Table IV.5.28

Variables in the Equation for Empathy


Age -0.302 0.140 4.653 1 0.31 0.739

Gender -0.379 0.237 2.573 1 0.109 0.684

Education 0.468 0.121 14.892 1 0.000 1.596

Occupation 0.216 0.77 7.772 1 0.005 1.241

Income -0.007 0.203 0.001 1 0.972 0.993

Family Size 0.594 0.185 10.285 1 0.001 1.811


for shopping

0.210 0.105 4.008 1 0.055 1.234


Constant -1.646 0.699 5.536 1 0.019 0.193

From the table, the variables such as education, occupation,

family size and preference for the shop were found to be

significant, which shows that these variables decide the satisfaction

level with regard to the dimension of empathy.

It is seen that the family size and education level in creases

the good level of satisfaction nearly about 1.8 and 1.6 times

respectively. Occupation also increases the good level of

satisfaction with a multiplicative factor of 1.2.

On the other hand, the preference for the shop reduces the

good level of sat isfaction which should be paid attention to by the

departmental stores to increase the satisfaction level of the

customers towards the various policies of the store.

customer satisfaction with regard to service quality...

Documents