Report of Nazmul-2003

A STUDY ON

Consumer satisfaction and attitude of Lucas battery

For the partial fulfillment of the course Research Methodology (MGT-411)

Name: Md Nazmul Islam

8thsemester (A)

Roll No.06671599

Under the supervision of-

Md. Shahidul Islam FakirAssistant Professor

Department of Management StudiesJagannath University

Dhaka.

Submission Date: June 21, 2012

Department of management studies

Jagannath University, Dhaka.

Introduction

1.1 Origin of the study

This report has been a part of BBA program supervised by Mr. Shahidul Islam Fakir, Assistat

Professor, Department of Management studies, Jagannath University. This report has been prepared on

“Consumer satisfaction and attitude of Lucas battery” at Rahimafrooz Ltd.

1.2 Problem Identification

Satisfying customers are the only way to stay competitive in today's marketplace. The balancing act

between what customers want and what company can provide must be optimized in order to maximize

company’s long-term profits. Lucas Battery already is in a good position in the consumer mind but by

understanding the customer satisfaction level, it will help the company to exceed the present level of

customer satisfaction.

For the last few years other battery companies’ growth is remarkable. The market share of Lucas is

high. Major portion of battery market is being captured by Lucas battery. Navana and Rangs have

improved a lot. Consumers’ perception about these brands is improving.

Now a day’s battery market is almost saturated and consumers are much more knowledgeable than

they were in past time. So Lucas Battery must have to know consumers needs and wants and attitude

towards Lucas Battery. Therefore the research problem is assessing the consumers’ satisfaction

situation of Lucas Battery.

1.3 Research Question

Are consumers satisfied with Lucas Battery of Rahimafrooz?

1.4 Objectives

Broad Objective

To find out in what extent consumers of Lucas battery are satisfied with the current level of

performance and what are the problems associated with the service provided.

Specific Objectives

The specific objectives are:

1. To find out the most preferable brand in battery industry

2. To find out how many customers give emphasis on performance to purchase battery.

3. To find the sources of information through which they get to know about Lucas Battery

4. To find the level of awareness level of customers about Lucas battery

5. To find the customers impression about durability of Lucas battery

1.5 Hypothesis

The hypothesis based on the specific objectives is given below:

1. In terms of price Lucas is the most preferable brand

2. Consumers are quality conscious about battery usage.

3. Performance of Lucas battery is excellent.

4. Customers are aware about Lucas battery.

5. Lucas batteries are durable

1.6 Scope

This study covers different zones at Dhaka city to estimate the satisfaction level of customer using

Lucas Battery. The scope of the study was fully on the basis of broad customer survey.

1.7 Methodology of the study:

1.7.1 Nature of the study:

The nature of this research is exploratory and both quantitative and qualitative methods are used. After

formulating the problem statement, a detailed background study has conducted. This background study

helped me to determine the necessary broad objectives. As the whole process is not structured enough,

the background study is done through exploratory research, using literature survey and experience

survey.

From the broad objectives, specific objectives were developed centering on single and multiple

concepts. The research requires primary data to meet the specific objectives.

1.7.2 Data Sources:

Primary data has been collected from following sources:

Industry user of battery

Household user of battery

Drivers

Motor cycle user

Commercial vehicle owner

Automobile user

Primary data has been collected through: -

Questionnaire.

Personal Interview

Observation

Secondary data collected from: -

Publications.

Internet

1.7.3 Design and Method

Research Approach and DesignSurvey Research and Rationale In relation to the conducting of

surveys, there are two broad categories of clients:Owner of Automobiles

Drivers

The type of survey research that was used for drivers was household survey for the clients. Household

surveys give depth of information. Since the questionnaire was very detailed and long for the

respondents to fill it up, household surveys gave the best environment available for the survey. The

questionnaire contained questions that require adequate attention from the respondents’ part and

household surveys made it easy for them to think deeply before answering any question.

1.7.4 Sampling Technique

The technique of sampling that was used in this research is non-probability sampling. The reason for

this is that there was no known or equal chance that every person of the population will be picked.

There was no sampling frame available of the population and its sub-groups.

The different zones were based on the qualitative study, whereby sales representatives gave an idea

about the proportions of customers from different areas or zones. The most number of customers are

from Dhanmondi, Motijheel and Elephant zone. The specific areas which fall under different zones are

shown below:

Area A: Motijheel/ Polton/ kamlapur

Area B: Dhanmondi / Kalabagan

Area C: Shahbag / Paribag

Area D: Lalmatia / Mohammadpur

Area E: Siddeswari / Shantinogor

Area F: Azimpur / Nilkhet / Elephant Road

1.7.5 Type of non-probability sampling

The type of non-probability sampling that has been used in this research is “Area based Sampling”

primarily where members of the population were chosen based on their zones. In a particular zone, the

method of choosing a customer was by ‘Convenience Sampling’, where members are chosen based on

their relative ease of access.

1.7.5.1 Sample Size Determination

Since the type of sampling used is non-probability sampling, the sample size has been determined in

terms of the time availability.

Survey Starting Date –20 May, 2012

Survey Completion Date – 20 June March, 2012

Total Time Allocated – 4 weeks

No. of surveys that can be carried out in a day (Avg) – 4

Calculation of sample number:

No. of weeks 4

No. of working days ×6

Total Number of working days 24

(-) Holidays on working days 8

__

16

(-) 2day for collection

of clients’ contact numbers,

Reporting, making phone calls,

Strategy discussions etc -2

14

(-) Day missed for miscellaneous

reasons -1

13

Effective No. of Days for Survey = 13

Total No. of Sample Respondents = Effective No. of Days × Avg No. per day

= 13 × 4

= 52-2

=50

1.7.6 Field Plan

Area wise sampling has been used for this research. The detail addresses and other required

information have been collected from Rahimafrooz batteries. Each sales representative maintains their

own collection of customers’ information. Appointments for surveys have been made by the

researcher and therefore two days are kept for making phone calls. It is expected and assumed that 4

interviews can be done in one day.

The area wise sample distribution of the actual survey is shown below:

Area/Zones Sample no.

A (Motijheel/ Polton/ kamlapur) 10

B (Dhanmondi / Kalabagan) 05

C (Shahbag / Paribag) 2

D (Lalmatia / Mohammadpur) 2

E (Siddeswari / Shantinogor) 2

F (Azimpur / Nilkhet / Elephant Road) 05

Total 26

Table 2: Number of Survey Respondents in Different Zones

1.8 LIMITATIONS

In the research I faced some obstacles that hindered me from obtaining the objectives of my project. In

brief the problems that I faced are:

Time problem was a significant problem for my report. In two months it was so difficult for me

to complete the survey.

Non response error – this type of error occurs when the researcher cannot locate the pre-

designated sample element to be studied.

Another significant problem was trying to strike a balance between finding the customers’ free

time and at the same time doing the required number of surveys each day.

Every organization has some rules and regulations regarding its privacy policy, so does

Rahimafrooz Batteries Ltd. Moreover financial information is regarded more sensitive. That is

why I failed to collect some market share related information in different months which would

have proved very effective in preparing the report. However this limitation is not very

unnatural.

Financial problem was another problem, because Rahimafrooz gave me this support but not in

that extent.

Experience comes into play in communicating the exact message under a topic, in some

instances my inexperience may show in the report.

The word ‘Satisfaction’ actually covers a large area. It extended my study somewhere but for

the same reason I had to restrict myself from various information’s that are relevant to

customer satisfaction.

Review of related literature: Customer Satisfaction

Customer satisfaction is the extent to which a product’s perceived performance matches a buyer’s expectations. (Philip Kotler, Prin. of Marketing, 2005, P.13)

“Everyone knows what satisfaction is, until asked to give a definition. Then, it seems, nobody knows.”

This quote from Richard L. Oliver (1977), respected expert and long time writer and researcher on the

topic of customer satisfaction, expresses the challenge of defining this most basic of customer concept.

Building from previous definitions, Oliver offers his own formal definition:

Satisfaction is the consumer’s fulfillment response. It is a judgment that a product or service feature,

or the product or service itself, provides a pleasurable level of consumption-related fulfillment.

The word satisfaction first appeared in English during the thirteenth century. The word satisfaction

itself is derived from the Latin satis (meaning enough) and the Latin ending - faction (from the Latin

facere - to do/make). Early usage centered on satisfaction being some sort of release from wrong

doing. Later citing of the word emphasis satisfaction as a "release from uncertainty" (The Oxford

Library of Words and Phrases, 1993). Modern usage of the word has tended to be much broader, and

satisfaction is clearly related to other words such as satisfactory (adequate), satisfy (make pleased or

contented) and satiation (enough). The difficulty faced when trying to define any word is that the

meaning often depends on the context in which the word is used. In a marketing context, satisfaction is

used to have a more "specific" meaning. It appears that there are two basic approaches adopted in

attempting to define the concept of customer satisfaction. Satisfaction can be viewed as an outcome of

a consumption activity or experience; however, it is also represented as a process. Currently, the most

widely adopted description of customer satisfaction is that of a process; an evaluation between what

was received and what was expected (Oliver, 1977, 1981; Olson and Dover, 1979; Tse and Wilton,

1988). By looking at satisfaction as a process, these definitions concentrate on the antecedents to

satisfaction rather than satisfaction itself. Consequently, much research effort has been directed at

understanding

the cognitive processes involved in satisfaction evaluations.

This strand of theory appears to have origins in discrepancy theory (Porter, 1961) and a number of

authors have, over the years, used some form of comparison to model satisfaction. Early contributions

include Contrast Theory (Cardozo, 1965; Howard and Sheth, 1969), which supposed that consumers

would exaggerate any contrasts between expectations and product evaluations. This was developed

into assimilation-contrast theory (Anderson, 1973). Many studies support the occurrence of

assimilation (Olshavsky and Miller, 1972; Olson and Dover, 1979).

A further point concerns expectations that are defined differently in the satisfaction and quality

literature. In the satisfaction literature "expectations reflect anticipated performance" (Churchill and

Suprenant, 1982, p. 492) made by the customer about the levels of performance during a transaction.

On the other hand, in the service quality literature, expectations are conceptualized as a normative

standard of future wants (Boulding, Kalra, Staelin & Zeithaml, 1993). These normative or ideal

standards represent enduring wants and needs that remain unaffected by the full range of marketing

and competitive factors. Normative expectations are therefore more stable and can be thought of as

representing the service the market oriented provider must constantly strive to offer (Zeithaml, Berry

& Parasurama, 1993).

Assuming that the customer is capable of evaluating the service performance, the result is compared to

expectation prior to purchase or consumption (Oliver, 1980). In the past, corporation did not pay much

attention to customer satisfaction but were focused more on attracting new customers to expand their

market share. Now, due to lower sales resulting from product maturity, corporations are turning

around to stabilizing their existing customers to ensure their market share (Dhabolkar & Thorpe,

1994). Thus the concept of customer satisfaction is under further scrutiny. For the current study, the

definition put forward by Oliver will be the construct, as it is the most appropriate for the selected

study.

ANOVA:

Suppose,

Hο= Customers of Lucas battery are satisfied.

Hı = Customers of Lucas battery are not satisfied.

Here the significance is .099 which is higher than the .05 level of significance.

So, Hο is not rejected. With some negative response, Customers are satisfied using Lucas battery.

.

Hypothesis Testing

Statistics

Brand preferability considering PRICE50

0

3.9600

2.07964

Valid

Missing

N

Mean

Std. Deviation

Brand preferability considering PRICE

16 32.0 32.0 32.0

12 24.0 24.0 56.0

6 12.0 12.0 68.0

5 10.0 10.0 78.0

5 10.0 10.0 88.0

4 8.0 8.0 96.0

2 4.0 4.0 100.0

50 100.0 100.0

Spark

Green Power

Hamko

Navana

Volvo

Lucas

Rangs

Total

ValidFrequency Percent Valid Percent

CumulativePercent

In the section below the hypothesis testing has been carried out.

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 1 :

To find out the most preferable brand in battery industry

Hypothesis tested under the objective:

“In terms of price Lucas is the most preferable brand.”

HO: In terms of price Lucas is the most preferable brand.

HA: In terms of price Lucas is not the most preferable brand.

Decision Rule: Null Hypothesis is not rejected if highest percentage of the respondents chooses Lucas

as their preferable brand.

Finding: 1

Statistics

Product quality of Lucas50

0

3.8000

1.06904

Valid

Missing

N

Mean

Std. Deviation

Product quality of Lucas

2 4.0 4.0 4.0

6 12.0 12.0 16.0

4 8.0 8.0 24.0

26 52.0 52.0 76.0

12 24.0 24.0 100.0

50 100.0 100.0

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither agree nor Disagree

Agree

Strongly Agree

Total


CumulativePercent

In terms of price, Spark is the most preferable brand following Green power, Hamko and Navana.

Lucas charges higher price than others because of its quality. Since price of Lucas is high Spark

captures major market share.

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 2:

To find out how many customer give emphasis on quality when they purchase Battery

Hypothesis tested under the objective

“Product quality of Lucas battery is satisfactory”

HO: Product quality of Lucas battery is satisfactory.

HA: Product quality of Lucas battery is not satisfactory.

Decision Rule: If Arithmetic mean is above 2.5 HO will not be rejected.

Finding: 2

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither agree nor Disagree

Agree

Strongly Agree

Product quality of Lucas

It is seen from the table above that the arithmetic mean is 3.8. This is well above 2.5 which means that

the mean is towards the side of agreement to the statement in the question. Thus it can be concluded

that Product quality of Lucas battery is satisfactory.


To find out how many customer give emphasis on performance to purchase battery.


“Performance of Lucas battery is excellent”

HO: Performance of Lucas battery is excellent.

HA: Performance of Lucas battery is poor


Respondent opinion about performance of Lucas

23 46.0 46.0 46.0

17 34.0 34.0 80.0

7 14.0 14.0 94.0

3 6.0 6.0 100.0

50 100.0 100.0

Average

Excellent

Outstanding

Below Average

Total


CumulativePercent

Statistics

Respondent opinion about performance of Lucas50

0

2.4400

.81215

Valid

Missing

N

Mean

Std. Deviation

Finding: 3

It is seen from the table above that the arithmetic mean is 2.44 which is well above 2.0 means that the

mean is towards the side of agreement to the statement in the question. Thus it can be concluded that

Product performance of Lucas battery is excellent.


Outstanding

Excellent

Average

Below Average

Respondent opinion about performance of Lucas

Statistics

Awareness level of Lucas50

0

3.0600

.91272

Valid

Missing

N

Mean

Std. Deviation

Awareness level of Lucas

5 10.0 10.0 10.0

4 8.0 8.0 18.0

24 48.0 48.0 66.0

17 34.0 34.0 100.0

50 100.0 100.0

Low

Below Average

Average

High

Total


CumulativePercent

To find the level of awareness level of customer about Lucas battery


“Customers are aware about Lucas battery”

HO: Customers are aware about Lucas battery

HA: Customers are not aware about Lucas battery


Finding: 4

Low

Below Average

Average

High

Awareness level of Lucas

Statistics

Battery of Lucas are Durable50

0

3.9000

.95298

Valid

Missing

N

Mean

Std. Deviation

Battery of Lucas are Durable

1 2.0 2.0 2.0

5 10.0 10.0 12.0

4 8.0 8.0 20.0

28 56.0 56.0 76.0

12 24.0 24.0 100.0

50 100.0 100.0

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither Disagreenor Agree

Agree

Strongly Agree

Total


CumulativePercent

It is seen from the table above that the arithmetic mean 3.06 which is well above 2.0 means that the

mean is towards the side of agreement to the statement in the question. Thus it can be concluded that

awareness level of Lucas battery is very high.


To find the customer impression about durability of Lucas battery


“Lucas batteries are durable”

HO: Lucas batteries are durable

HA: Lucas batteries not are durable


Finding: 5

It is seen from the table above that the arithmetic mean is 3.90 which is well above 2.5 so we can say

that the mean is towards the side of agreement to the statement in the question. Thus it can be

concluded that the battery of Lucas is durable.

Recommendation and Conclusion

Recommendation

The following recommendations can be draw for the further development of customer satisfaction of the Lucas battery-

Customers are price sensitive. With quality of battery they also consider price when they take

decision to purchase of battery.

Compare to other battery company price of Lucas battery is high that help others brand to gain

more market share. So, price of Lucas battery should be competitive.

Purchase decision also depends on availability of battery. According to respondent Battery of

Lucas is available but to capture more make share it should search new market and make it

available.

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither Disagree nor Agree

Agree

Strongly Agree

Battery of Lucas are Durable

Consumers give emphasis on quality when they purchase battery. Rahimafrooz should

communicate with the customer of Lucas about its quality. Consumers may face some shorts of

rumor for which they might be confused about purchase of Lucas.

In customer mind, performance of Lucas battery is good enough. But now-a-days battery

market is competitive, so product performance of Lucas should never be deteriorated rather

improving.

The more frequent the advertisements of a brand, the more familiarity the brand gains.

Familiarity creates an impression that influences the purchase decision. Using different media

Lucas should inform its present and future customer about its product quality, performance etc.

among different media TV, Billboard and sticker has better power to influence the customer.

If customers are more aware about a product, that will help them to take decision. Different

campaign should be launched to aware the prospect.

Battery is purchased for long time use, so its durability is essential feature. More durability of

the battery more loyal customer will be created. Comparing to other brands Lucas is more

durable .it should maintain its performance.

After sales service should be available so that customer can easily get the service.

Since battery is technical product, through seminar or training product knowledge of sales

representative should be enhanced.

Conclusion

Lucas battery is the market leader in battery sector of our country. In each category of battery usages it

is clearly leading in the market with wide range of model. Though Lucas possesses more market share

but in the near future it may face tough competition with its competitors. In within few years some

new companies make this market so competitive among them Volvo and Green Power from Panna

group and Hamko. Launching new product these company offer low price to dealer and retailer level

so, it hamper the present growth rate of Lucas. In this situation strategies should be improved or

restructured depending on findings in secondary research, qualitative and quantitative studies.

As a market leader Lucas battery has the competitive advantage. Its price may high but there is an

advantage that quality and product performance is higher than any other brand and operating long time

in the market it has positive image in customer mind.

Bibliography

Books

1. Naresh K. Malhotra, Marketing Research, 5th Edition Prentice-hall 2008,ch-3,8,10,11,16,17.

2. Douglas A Lind, Statistical Techniques in Business and Economics ,13th Edition, McGraw Hill 2008, ch12,13,14

3. Philip Kotler, Principles of Marketing, 11th Edition, Prentice-hall 2006, PP.13,19

4. Lawrence L. Lapin, Statistics for Modern Business Decisions,6th Edition, Dryden, 1993, PP.407.413.423

5. Raymond V. Lesikar, Business Communication, 6th Edition, A.I.T.B.S 2003, PP.429-466

Sources

Annual report Of “Rahimafrooz Batteries Ltd” in 2006

Annual report Of “Rahimafrooz Batteries Ltd” in 2007

Websites

www.wikipedia.com

www.rahimafrooz.com/...batteries/rahimafrooz_batteries_profile.asp

www.rahimafrooz.com

Appendix

Questionnaire

The information given by you will help me to accomplish a survey based internship report, and here I also assure you that the information given by you will be kept as confidential data and use only for academic purpose. So I am looking forward to get your support.

1. Contact person:

Name:………………………………………..

[Please put tick marks ( ) in appropriate box]2. Gender:

Male Female

3. Designation:

Industry user Driver Motor cycle user Commercial vehicle owner Automobile owner

http://www.rahimafrooz.com/

http://www.rahimafrooz.com/...batteries/rahimafrooz_batteries_profile.asp

http://www.wikipedia.com/

Others

4. Price has an impact on battery purchase-

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree

5. In terms of price which one is the most preferable brand to you?

Lucas Spark Navana Rangs Volvo Green power Hamko

6. Which brand you bought last time?

Lucas Hamko Navana Rangs Green power Spark Volvo Others…………………..

7. Do you recall the name of Lucas whenever you think about battery?

Always Sometimes Never

8. Awareness level of Lucas battery is high


9. Do you recommend Lucas battery to others?

Yes No

10. Lucas battery is durable


11. What is your perception about quality of Lucas battery?

Outstanding Excellent Average Below average

Documents

Report of Nazmul-2003