kw report
TRANSCRIPT
1
“A Study on Customer Satisfaction and Positioning of Kwality Walls Ice Cream”
(A Marketing Research project)
Submitted by,
Costa Joshua Lionel
Liju Thomas
Anagha Varghese
Surandra Nagar
Clint Winston Cornelio
2
Table Of Contents
SL.NO Title Pg No.
1 Executive Summary 3
2 Introduction to the Study 4
3 Research Design 5
4 Research results 9
5 Mutiple Regression Test 15
6 Factor Analysis 19
7 Independent Sample Test 22
8 Positioning Study 24
9 Conclusion 33
10 Suggestions 34
11 Annexure 36
3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The ice cream industry in India is worth Rs. 2,000 crores. In 2008-09, in the branded ice
cream market, Amul held the number one spot, with a market share or 38%, followed by
Kwality Walls at 14%, Vadilal at 12% and Mother Diary at 8%. The per capita consumption
of ice cream in India is approximately 300 ml, as against the world average of 2.3 liters per
annum. Vanilla, Strawberry and Chocolate together constitute approximately 60% of the
market. The per capita consumption of ice creams in India is just 300 ml per annum,
compared to 22 liters in the US, 18 liters in Australia, 14 liters in Sweden. India is a way too
far behind even in terms of the world average per capita ice cream consumption of 2.3 liters
per annum.
A major trend that is witnessing a change is the seasonal nature of the industry, the peak
seasons being April-June. The challenges faced are competition from other players, from
other like food like cold drinks, coffee, juice etc.
With other players in the market competing for market share, the major challenge for Kwality
Walls lies in keeping the brand alive in the market. This is mainly done by understanding the
positioning of the company and the level of satisfaction of the customers of the company.
This study focuses on the customer satisfaction and positioning of Kwality Walls. Kwallity
Wall’s was launched in 1995 as Hindustan Unilever Ltd ‘s. master brand for ice creams.
Hindustan Unilever started by merging 6 existing ice cream brands in the country and then
launched Kwallity Wall’s range of ice creams and frozen desserts. Unilever is the world's
biggest ice cream manufacturer, with an annual turnover of €5 billion.
The research group has surveyed 50 respondents, 25 male and 25 female, within and outside
SJCBA. Outsiders included professionals. The group has conducted focus group interviews
with respondents from homogenous background, in depth interviews and Questionnaire
surveys. The respondents were a mixture of old and new users of Kwality Walls.
4
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
This study focuses on the two key concepts that contribute to the success of a business-
Customer satisfaction and Brand Positioning.
Customer satisfaction refers to how the products or services offered by a company meets the
expectations of the customers or outshines it. It is a vital performance indicator and measures
how the brand accepted among the customers.
Positioning is a process of creating a brand image for the company which is easily recognized
by the public. A good positioning is one that stays in the minds of a consumer over a long
period of time. A strong positioning strategy will create a lasting impression on the minds of
the consumers which will help the company in the long run to retain old customers as well as
create new ones.
These two attributes are among the key indicators of the brand’s performance in the market.
They define the success or failure of a brand with respect to its customers. The Research
group has studied in-depth the contribution of these factors in the overall acceptance of the
brand.
5
RESESARCH DESIGN
1. Statement of Study
This study is on customer satisfaction and positioning of Kwality Walls.
2. Scope of study
The scope of the study is to measure the responses of customers in terms of their
satisfaction for Kwality Walls Ice cream in relation to its competitors. It also analyzes
the current market potential as well as overall positioning of Kwality Walls.
3. Objectives:
• To analyse the major competitors for Kwality Walls Ice Cream.
• To assess the effectiveness of Kwality Walls Ice cream as a brand with respect to
its competitors.
• To study the customer satisfaction of Kwality Walls Ice Cream.
• To study the brand positioning of Kwality Walls Ice Cream.
• To find out the current potential of Kwality Walls in the market.
4. Research Methodology
The methodology followed by the Research Group consists of both Qualitative and
Quantitative research techniques.
The data used is only Primary data.
Sources of Data:
Focus Group interviews:
Focus group consists of a small group of people gathered together to have a detailed
discussion on their opinions over a particular subject.
The Research Group conducted a focus group interview on a group consisting of 8
people who were customers of Ice Cream. The group argued on the pros and cons of
Kwality Walls Ice Cream and those of each of its competitors.
6
In Depth Interviews:
An In Depth interview is an open ended, one-to-one interview conducted on an
individual to understand his or her perceptions, attitudes and underlying behaviors
towards a particular subject.
The Research Group conducted an in depth interview on two respondents, who were
loyal customers of Kwality Walls Ice Cream.
Questionnaire:
A questionnaire is a series of well structured questions asked in a formatted manner to
the respondents to gather information on a subject.
The Research Group conducted questionnaire surveys on 50 respondents. The
respondents included students of SJCBA, professionals and users of Kwality Walls
Ice Cream. The questionnaire consisted of both open ended and close ended questions
with different scales like Nominal, Interval (Likert, Semantic Differential), and Ratio
scale.
5. Sampling Plan
For this study, the Research group selected a sample size of 50 respondents and the
questionnaire was personally administered and surveyed. The survey was conducted
with students and professionals and the respondents were consumers of Kwality Walls
Ice Cream.
7
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The sample we chose for this study involved respondents broadly classified into four
categories namely, Students, Working Professionals and Retired people. The age group
varied from 20 to 37 years of age. By this, we avoided a bias that could get into the result due
to the opinion of only say, youth in the result. The diagram below shows the distribution of
respondents by age:
Keeping in mind the fact that Tastes and Preferences could be different between male and female, The Gender distribution of the sample was also kept unbiased with an equal number of respondents from both genders shown in the figure below:
8
6. Tools and Techniques for Data Collection:
• The primary tool used for the study was questionnaires, which were basically
designed for the consumer segment study and an excel sheet format for tracking of
collected data.
• The survey was conducted using the personal interview method.
• In depth interviews.
• Focus group interview
• Microsoft Excel and PASW Statistics were used for data analysis and graphical
representation of results.
7. Plan of Analysis
• The following tests were carried out on the data:
• Means and Variances on each of the attributes of satisfaction for Kwality Walls.
• Check for internal consistency of scale for satisfaction.
• Degree of association between Gender and Overall Satisfaction and between Age
and overall satisfaction
• Multiple Regression to identify attributes critical to overall satisfaction
• Factor analysis to identify multicollinearity
8. Limitations of the study:
• Less number of sample sizes.
• Restriction of the study to students and professionals thereby also limiting the age
group of the respondents.
9
RESEARCH RESULTS:
Qualitative:
FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION RESULTS:
The focus group interview was conducted with 8 participants at St. Joseph’s College of
Business Administration. The participants were primarily students and patrons of the product.
The areas probed into during the focus group interview were :
1. Frequency of Consumption
2. Attributes considered important in satisfaction of Ice Cream
3. Brands mainly consumed
Most of the respondents consumed once a week on an average. Only, A few respondents
consumed it at an even lesser frequency, once a month.
This could be attributed to the relatively cool climate in Bangalore as also the fear of
contracting illness due to common cold and influenza quite common in the city.
With regard to satisfaction attributes, all respondents mentioned Brand as an important
decider in which Ice-Cream to purchase. They regarded Brand Image as an important
attribute. Additionally, good brands usually sport good and well located parlors, though the
ice cream may also be more expensive. Availability of a wide range of flavors was also cited
as an important reason to purchase a particular brand of ice cream. Some People usually have
a range of flavors they wish to try while others have a particular flavor that is their favorite
and they wish to consume it repeatedly. Hence both, the quality of a particular flavor and
variety of flavors were considered important attributes in purchase of a given brand of Ice-
Cream.
Price and Rate were also considered important. Moreover, it was value for money I.e. Price
linked to quality and quantity that was considered an important decider in purchasing an Ice-
Cream brand. As expected, the more the quantity and quality available at a given price, the
higher the satisfaction. Another attribute mentioned by one of the participants was packaging.
Attractively packed Ice-Cream can attract a consumer and be a source of motivation to
10
purchase. It is on packaging and presentation that higher end Ice-Cream brands usually gain
an advantage over average priced Ice-Cream brands.
Variety of flavors was also considered an important attribute.
Coming to the last question on popular brands, there were contrasting opinions which could
mainly relate to availability and pricing of the product. At the higher end, with higher prices
and better parlors were brands like Baskin Robbins, Ben and Jerry’s, and Cream Bell. It is
interesting to note that respondents who mentioned these Ice-Cream brands as being popular
also regarded “Brand” as an important attribute to purchase. There were respondents who
consumed the Ice-Cream with very less frequency and those that consumed it often. In the
Mid segment, there was Naturals. People citing Naturals as their favorite brand also
mentioned “Variety” and “Flavors” as important attributes in purchasing Ice-Cream which is
synonymous with brands such as Naturals.
At the lower range, with a lower price segment and mostly over the counter purchases, were
brands such as Arun’s and Uncle John’s.
11
Quantitative:
Measures of Central Tendency:
The first and most basic measure of Central Tendency considered was a mean (Average) of
all satisfaction attributes identified (mainly from the Focus Group Discussion). The same
attributes were attached in the questionnaire with the 7 point Likert Scale where respondents
could rate Kwality Walls Ice Cream on each of the attributes separately. The questionnaire
section has been attached below for reference:
Section A Q1.Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following attributes of Kwality Walls. Circle the
most appropriate
Extremely
Dissatisfied
Extremely
Satisfied
1. Overall Satisfaction with the
Icecream 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. Good Value for money 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. Widely available during all seasons 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4. Large variety of flavors 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5. Attractive promotions and offers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6. Attractive Packaging 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7. Taste 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8. Richness of milk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9. Sweetness 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
10
Toppings/ Extra add ons
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
11 Texture 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
12 Availability in various quantities 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
12
The means were plotted on a bar diagram as shown in the figure above:
From the figure we observe that, Kwality Walls scores highest on Taste (6 on 7) and lowest
on Promos and Offers (4.5 on 7). Other attributes have an average score of between 5 to 5.5
Hence it is safe to say that respondents in general were Highly Satisfied with the “Taste” of
Kwality Walls Ice Cream. However, Kwality Walls also scored well in other crucial aspects
such as richness and sweetness which are indicative of quality in the case of Ice Cream.
However, Kwality Walls did not score very well in Toppings / Add-ons and Promos and
Offers which is acceptable given that Kwality Walls is not a very active Marketer and into
much publicity and already healthy market share. Also by scoring it low, respondents feel
that Kwality Walls Packaging must be improved and made more attractive and appealing in
general. However, it’s validity in case of higher end family packs are questionable as the
same already comes in a good reusable plastic container. However, it may be applicable for
the lower end and cheaper products.
13
Next, we plotted variance and Standard Deviation of the attributes and the figure shown
above appeared. It was observed that variance was highest on Promos and Offers and the
textures and add-ons attributes touching 1.7 and 1.6 respectively in both cases. This implied
that People had varying opinions and views on these attributes. Incidentally, both these
attributes have a high dependency on the type of Ice-Cream and the quantity / frequency
purchased at a time. People purchasing large quantities (especially during festive seasons)
were in better chances of receiving offers and promotional schemes. Similarly, it also
depended on where people purchased the product. Purchasing over the counter has lesser
chances of availing of an offer as against purchasing at a mall / fair / kiosk etc. Also, toppings
and add-ons may not be present in some Ice-Creams (especially lower end and cheaper
variants). However, it is observed that the intrinsic attributes such as Taste, Richness and
Sweetness were highly similar across respondents suggesting the consistency in Kwality
walls Ice Cream’s quality aspect irrespective of the Ice Cream type/quantity purchased. So
also, respondents consistently felt that Kwality Walls had Value for Money, was highly
available and in various flavours and quantities which is suggestive of the Ice-Creams
popularity across the customer base.
Variance
STD
14
TO TEST THE RELIABILITY OF THE SCALE shown above we used the Cronbach’s
Alpha Test. A value of 0.6 and greater suggests a reliable scale. The value for the scale was
found to be 0.876.
Reliability of a scale is the ability of the scale to measure consistently across situations. (In
this case respondents). It typically works by comparing the intercorrelations between
responses given for the same question by the entire sample. Higher correlations imply a
higher consistency in results and hence higher reliability (value of Cronbach’s Alpha).
Reliability however, should not be mistaken for validity. A cronbach’s alpha of 1 suggests a
most reliable scale.
Case Processing Summary
N %
Cases Valid 50 100.0
Excludeda 0 .0
Total 50 100.0
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the
procedure.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.876 11
15
MULTIPLE REGRESSION TEST:
Purpose:
This test would help identify which of the eleven attributes chosen were determinants of
overall satisfaction for Kwality Walls.
Considering:
X1 = Value_for_money
X2 = Availability
X3 = Variety_of_flavours
X4 = Promos and Offers
X5 = Packaging
X6 = Taste
X7 = Richness
X8 = Sweetness
X9 = Toppings_addOns
X10 = Texture
X11 = Availability in various quantities
Step I. Check that there is NO Multicollinearity
As the output indicates, Tolerance is above 0.1 and VIF is below 10 for all attributes
implying NO Multicollinearity between the predictor variables.
16
As shown from the figure above, it has been observed that there is NO Multicollinearity
Step II. Check for R 2 = 0
From
the output it is observed that R2 = 0.579 > 0
Step III. Identify H 0 and H 1 and compare p value with Significance for each att ribute.
The SPSS output for Multiple Regression at 95% has been displayed below:
17
i.) H0: B1 = 0 ; H1: B1 ≠ 0
P = 0.892 > 0.05
Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is no significant correlation between Value for
Money and Overall Satisfaction
ii.) H0: B2 = 0 ; H1: B2 ≠ 0
P = 0.181 > 0.05
Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is NO significant correlation between Availability
and Overall Satisfaction
iii.) H0: B3 = 0 ; H1: B3 ≠ 0
P = 0.184 > 0.05
Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is NO significant correlation between Variety of
flavours and Overall Satisfaction
iv.) H0: B4 = 0 ; H1: B4 ≠ 0
P = 0.547 > 0.05
Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is NO significant correlation between Promos and
Offers and Overall Satisfaction
v.) H0: B5 = 0 ; H1: B5 ≠ 0
P = 0.487 > 0.05
Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is NO significant correlation between Packaging
and Overall Satisfaction
vi.) H0: B6 = 0 ; H1: B6 ≠ 0
P = 0.102 > 0.05
Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is NO significant correlation between Taste and
Overall Satisfaction.
18
vii.) H0: B7 = 0 ; H1: B7 ≠ 0
P = 0.234 > 0.05
Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is NO significant correlation between Richness
and Overall Satisfaction
viii H 0: B8 = 0 ; H1: B8 ≠ 0
P = 0.372 > 0.05
Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is No significant correlation between Sweetness
and Overall Satisfaction
ix.) H0: B9 = 0 ; H1: B9 ≠ 0
P = 0.134 > 0.05
Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is a NO significant correlation between Toppings
and Add-Ons and overall satisfaction
x.) H0: B10 = 0 ; H1: B10 ≠ 0
P = 0.926 > 0.05
Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is NO significant correlation between Texture and
Overall Satisfaction
xi.) H0: B11 = 0 ; H1: B11 ≠ 0
P = 0.947 > 0.05
Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is no significant correlation between Availability
in various quantities and Overall Satisfaction.
Step iv.) Develop the regression equation
There is no regression equation for Overall Satisfaction as none of the attributes identified are
significant to the Overall Satisfaction of Kwality Walls.
19
FACTOR ANALYSIS:
In order to determine attributes that have a strong co linearity between them, we carried out a
factor analysis. From the factor analysis it was observed that:
r between Taste and Sweetness = 0.785
r between Richness and Sweetness = 0.678
r between Taste and Richness = 0.637
Hence, we clubbed all the above 3 predictor variables into a single variable
Average_Richness_Taste_Sweetness by computing an average for the above 3 values
for each respondent.
Considering:
X1 = Value_for_money
X2 = Availability
X3 = Variety_of_flavours
X4 = Promos and Offers
X5 = Packaging
X6 = Toppings_addOns
X7 = Texture
X8 = Availability in various quantities
X9 = Average_Richness_Sweetness_Taste
20
On rerunning the regression, the following output was observed:
i.) H0: B1 = 0 ; H1: B1 ≠ 0
P = 0.396 > 0.05 Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is no significant correlation between Value for Money and Overall Satisfaction
ii.) H0: B2 = 0 ; H1: B2 ≠ 0
P = 0.341 > 0.05 Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is NO significant correlation between Availability and Overall Satisfaction
iii.) H0: B3 = 0 ; H1: B3 ≠ 0
P = 0.257 > 0.05 Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is NO significant correlation between Variety of flavours and Overall Satisfaction
iv.) H0: B4 = 0 ; H1: B4 ≠ 0
P = 0.229 > 0.05 Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is NO significant correlation between Promos and Offers and Overall Satisfaction
21
v.) H0: B5 = 0 ; H1: B5 ≠ 0
P = 0.635 > 0.05 Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is NO significant correlation between Packaging and Overall Satisfaction
vi.) H0: B6 = 0 ; H1: B6 ≠ 0
P = 0.398 > 0.05 Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is NO significant correlation between Taste and Overall Satisfaction.
vii.) H0: B7 = 0 ; H1: B7 ≠ 0
P = 0.735 > 0.05 Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is NO significant correlation between Richness and Overall Satisfaction
viii H 0: B8 = 0 ; H1: B8 ≠ 0
P = 0.657 > 0.05 Hence we retain the null hypothesis. There is No significant correlation between Sweetness and Overall Satisfaction
ix.) H0: B9 = 0 ; H1: B9 ≠ 0
P = 0.028 < 0.05 Hence we reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternate hypothesis. There is a significant correlation between Average_Richness_Taste_Sweetness and overall satisfaction
Step iv.) Develop the regression equation
Y = 0.370 * X9
Y = Overall Satisfaction
X9 = Average_Taste_Richness_Sweetness
22
The First INDEPENDENT SAMPLES T-TEST was carried out between Age and Overall satisfaction.
H0: There is no significant association between Age and Overall Satisfaction.
H1: There is a significant association between Age and Overall Satisfaction.
The output of the Independent Samples T-Test is shown below:
Group Statistics
age_co
de N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Overall_Satisfaction 1.00 25 6.16 .688 .138
2.00 23 5.52 .790 .165
P = 0.251 > 0.05
Thus we retain the Null Hypothesis.
Hence, there is no significant association between Age and Overall Satisfaction of Kwality
Walls.
Group 1 refers to respondents that are 23 years of age and below
Group 2 refers to respondents that are above 23 years of age
23
The second Independent Samples T-Test was carried out between Gender and Overall
satisfaction.
H0: There is no significant association between Gender and Overall Satisfaction.
H1: There is a significant association between Gender and Overall Satisfaction.
The output of the Independent Samples T-Test is shown below:
Group Statistics
gender N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Overall_Satisfaction male 23 5.74 .752 .157
female 25 5.96 .841 .168
P = 0.910 > 0.05
Thus we retain the Null Hypothesis
Hence, there is no significant association between Gender and Overall Satisfaction of
Kwality Walls.
The means have been plotted below:
24
POSITIONING STUDY:
As part of the study we mapped five brands of ice cream (including Kwality Walls) on
various dimensions. The other brands mapped included Dairy Day, Amul, Vadilal and Arun
Ice Cream. The positioning was carried out on the basis of six dimensions namely,
ONE WAY ANOVA:
This test is used to check if there is preferences tending towards any particular brand on a
particular attribute. The test uses variances.
Taste:
The means plot for “Taste” attribute across various brands is as shown
below:
H0: There is no difference in means in “Taste” attribute across the brands of Ice-Cream
H1: There is a difference in means in “Taste” attribute across the brands of Ice-Cream
25
P=0.000 < 0.05.
Hence, we reject the Null Hypothesis (There is a significant difference between means on
“Taste” across the Five Brands).
From the means comparison plot shown above, we see that Kwality Walls scores highest on
Taste
Richness:
26
H0: There is no difference in means in “Richness” attribute across the brands of Ice-Cream
H1: There is a difference in means in “Richness” attribute across the brands of Ice-Cream
P = 0.000 < 0.05
Hence, we reject the Null Hypothesis (There is a significant difference between means on
“Richness” across the Five Brands).
From the Means plot comparsion above we see that Amul is the Leader in the Richness
Attribute
Availability:
27
H0: There is no difference in means in “Availability” attribute across the brands of Ice-Cream
H1: There is a difference in means in “Availability” attribute across the brands of Ice-Cream
P = 0.000 < 0.05
Hence, we reject the Null Hypothesis. (There is NO difference between means on
“Availability” across the Five Brands).
28
From the Means comparison plot we see that Kwality Walls is the leader in the Availability
attribute
Promos and Offers:
H0: There is no difference in means in “Promotions and Offers” attribute across the brands of
Ice-Cream
H1: There is a difference in means in “Promotions and Offers” attribute across the brands of
Ice-Cream
29
P = 0.000 < 0.05
Hence, we reject the Null Hypothesis. (There is a significant difference between means on
“Promotions and Offers” across the Five Brands).
From the means comparison plot, we see that Amul is the leader in Promotions and Offers
Toppings and Add-Ons:
H0: There is no difference in means in “Toppings and Add-Ons” attribute across the brands of
Ice-Cream
H1: There is a difference in means in “Toppings and Add-Ons” attribute across the brands of
Ice-Cream
30
ANOVA
brand_toppings
Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 51.361 4 12.840 8.079 .000
Within Groups 386.187 243 1.589
Total 437.548 247
p = 0.000 < 0.05
Hence, we reject the Null Hypothesis. (There is a significant difference between the means on
“Toppings and Add-Ons” attribute across the Five Brands)
From the Means comparison plot, we see that Kwality Walls is the leader in Toppings and
Add Ons.
Variety of Flavours:
The Means comparison plot of Variety of Flavors is as shown below:
31
H0: There is no difference in means in “Variety of Flavors” attribute across the brands of Ice-
Cream
H1: There is a difference in means in “Variety of Flavors” attribute across the brands of Ice-
Cream
ANOVA
Variety_of_flavors
Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 51.361 4 12.840 8.079 .000
Within Groups 386.187 243 1.589
Total 437.548 247
32
p = 0.000 < 0.05
Hence, we reject the Null Hypothesis. (There is a significant difference between the means on
“Variety of Flavors” attribute across the Five Brands)
From the Means comparison plot, we see that Kwality Walls is the leader in Variety of
Flavors.
A CONSOLIDATED DIAGRAM SHOWING ALL ATTRIBUTES IN ONE:
33
Conclusions:
There is only one single attribute is significant to overall satisfaction at a confidence of 95%.
on conducting a Factor Analysis and grouping it was found that Taste, Sweetness and
Richness are significant to Overall Satisfaction.
As expected, Taste in any food product is essential and Kwality Walls also scores highest on
Taste when positioned against other competitors. Kwality Walls also scores highest on
Availability, another attribute found to be significant to Overall Satisfaction. As is known,
Kwality Walls already has a strong market presence with its Ice Cream distributed in Parlors,
Department Stores, Hyper marts and even many restaurants. Moreover the variance on this
attribute was found to be low, indicating an even availability and distribution of Kwality
Walls in the market for various customers. In the third attribute, Variety of Flavors it is found
that Kwality Walls again leads the market due to its large variety of flavors as also the
various types available such as Cone, Cup, Bar etc. However, on the dimension of richness,
Kwality Walls is rated second after Amul and must improve on this dimension as it is
Significant to Overall Satisfaction
There was no significant association observed between Gender and Overall Satisfaction as
indicated by the Independent samples T-Test and there was no significant association
observed between age and Overall Satisfaction as indicated by the Independent samples T-
Test.
34
Suggestions (from Questionnaires)
The questionnaires distributed gathered the following suggestions from the Kwality Walls Ice
Cream customers.
� More Flavours and variety
� Better promotions campaigns, offers and branding.
� Better availability and in different quantities at a competitive price. More outlets can
be opened selling Kwality Walls Ice Cream.
� The price can be reduced so that everyone can afford
� Focus on quality and taste
� Attractive offers
� More toppings with nuts and almonds
It can also be noted that some customers were completely satisfied and they had the opinion
that the taste, flavors etc were great and did not want any further improvements.
35
Suggestions (from Research Results)
Kwality Walls should do better in terms of Promotions and Offers. They should release
discount offers, cash prizes and coupons often to attract more customers, even though they
already have a decent market share.
Customers felt that in terms of Richness (a symbol of quality in Ice-Cream) Amul was higher
than Kwality Walls. Kwality Walls should thus improve the quality of ingredients used in its
Ice Cream. Moreover, from the perspective of Richness there is a very less variance which
indicates that most respondents did agree with the above result.
Kwality Walls is already doing well in the important dimensions of Taste and Sweetness.
In terms of toppings and add-ons a large variance is found in the result which is indicative
that customers buying different types of Kwality Walls Ice-Creams have different
experiences in terms of Toppings and Add-Ons. Probably respondents buying lower end Ice-
Cream that would not have Toppings and Add-Ons would not be aware of a rating and have
hence taken a neutral stand.
A declining trend of overall satisfaction has also been observed with an increase in Age of the
respondent. However, through the Chi-Square test it has also been observed that there is NO
significant association between age and overall satisfaction.
36
ANNEXURE
KWALITY WALLS ICE CREAM SURVEY
Dear Respondent, We, students of St. Joseph’s College of Business Administration are conducting a survey for satisfaction with Kwality Walls Ice Cream as part of an academic curricular project. Please take a couple of minutes to answer this questionnaire on your satisfaction level for Kwality Walls Ice Cream. The responses will be used in our project analysis only and individual details will be kept confidential.
Section A Q1.Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following attributes of Kwality Walls. Circle the
most appropriate
Extremely
Dissatisfied Extremely
Satisfied
1. Overall Satisfaction with the
Icecream 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. Good Value for money 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. Widely available during all
seasons 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4. Large variety of flavors 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5. Attractive promotions and offers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6. Attractive Packaging 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7. Taste 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8. Richness of milk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9. Sweetness 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
10 Toppings/ Extra add ons 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
11 Texture 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
12 Availability in various quantities 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Q.13) Have you experienced any problem with Kwality Walls Ice Cream?
� Yes
� No
Q.14) If Yes, when you approached how satisfied were you with the response from the company?
37
Extremely
Dissatisfied Extremely
Satisfied
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Q.15.How do you think Kwality walls can be improved ?
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Section B
Q16) Circle/tick the most appropriate option.
How important are the following attributes to you when you purchase a pack of icecream?
How do you perceive the following companies performance in the following attributes?
1.Taste 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Kwality
Walls 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Dairy Day 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Amul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Vadilal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Arun 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. Availability 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Kwality
Walls 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Dairy Day 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Amul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Vadilal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Arun 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
.
3.Richness of
Milk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Kwality
Walls 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Dairy Day 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Amul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Vadilal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Arun 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Excellent
Most
Important Excellent
Most
Important Excellent
Least
Important
Most
Important
Poor Excellent
Least
Important
Least
Important
Least
Important
Most
Important Poor
Poor
Poor
38
4.Variety of
Flavours 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Kwality
Walls 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Dairy Day 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Amul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Vadilal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Arun 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5.Promotions
and Offers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Kwality
Walls 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Dairy Day 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Amul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Vadilal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Arun 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6.toppings/add-
ons 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Kwality
Walls 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Dairy Day 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Amul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Vadilal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Arun 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Section C
A little bit about Yourself :
Q17) Age: _________
Q18) Gender:
� Male � Female
Q19) Current Occupation:
� Student
� Working Professional
� Self Employed
� Retired
� Other ______________
Q20) No. of family members (including yourself)
Least
Important
Most
Important
Excellent
Most
Important Excellent
Least
Important
Poor
Poor
39
� <2
� 2-4
� 5-7
Thank you for your time and participation !
40