By Group 04M2

ARYA KUMAR SEN 1220212RAVI SHANKAR 1220230 SUSAN KOSHY 1220260

MOHAMMED HUSSAIN 1220321 VISHWANATH SONNAD 1220343

Market Research:

Title

A study of factors Influencing Selection of Management Colleges in India

(A Case of CUIM, Bangalore)

Objectives

• To analyze the choices made by students in selecting management colleges.

• To determine the factors which are most important in selecting a B School.

Research Methodology

• Sample Size: 44

• Respondents: Students of Christ University

• Place of Study: Christ University Kengeri Campus

Research Methodology

• Type of questions: Structured & Unstructured

• No. of variables 14

• Sampling: Convenience Sampling

• Decision of Variable selection: Focus group discussion

Demographics

Male36

82%

Female8

18%

Gender

Pie Chart 1

Interpretation:As we can see from the above pie chart 82% of respondents are males which form the majority.From chart 18% of respondents are females and minority.

20-2218

42%

23-2524

56%

26-281

2%

Above 280

0%

Age

Pie Chart 2

Interpretation:As we can see from the above pie chart 56% of respondents are aged between 23 and 25.From chart 42% of respondents are aged between 20 and 22 and 2% between 26 to 28.We can say that majority of about 98% respondents are aged between 20 and 25.

23, 57%

12, 30%

2, 5%2, 5% 0, 0%

1, 3%

Education Background

B.Tech B.Com BBA B.Sc BA Other

Pie Chart 3

Interpretation:As we can see from the above pie chart 58% of respondents have studied engineering.From chart 30% of respondents have studied B.com.5% of respondents have studied BBA and B.SC each.So there is a overall representation of all degrees.

5, 12%

12, 28%

13, 30%

13, 30%

Annual Household Income

Up to 3 Lakhs 3-5 Lakhs 5-8 Lakhs Above 8 Lakhs

Doughnut Chart 1

Interpretation:As we can see from the above chart 30% of respondents have annual household income between 5 to 8 Lakhs and Above 8 Lakhs each.From the chart 28% of respondents have annual income between 3 to 5 Lakhs and 12% upto 3 Lakhs.So there is a overall representation of respondents have annual household income above 3 Lakhs with 88% representation.

Gender * Age Cross tabulation

Count Age Total

20-22 23-25 26-28 Above 28

Gender

Male 37.14285714

%57.14285714

%2.9 % 2.9 % 35

Female 62.5 % 37.5 % 0 % 0 % 8

Total 18 23 1 1 43

Interpretation:This cross tabulation shows the various combinations of values of gender types i.e. male & female and Age categories i.e. 20-22. 23-25, 26-28 & above 28.

For example: Females under “Above 28 age category” are 2.9 % of total females i.e. 35.

Gender * Education * Age Cross tabulation

Count

Age Education Total

B. Tech B. Com BBA B. Sc

20-22 Gender Male 33.333 % 50 % 8.333 % 8.333 % 12

Female 20 % 60 % 20 % 0 % 5

Total 5 9 2 1 17

23-25 Gender Male 73.684 % 10.53 % 10.53 % 5.263 % 19

Female 66.667 % 0 % 0 % 33.33 % 3

Total 16 2 2 2 22

26-28 Gender Male 100 % 1

Total 1 1

Above 28 Gender Male 100 % 1

Total 1 1

Total Gender Male 60.606 % 24.24 % 9.091 % 6.061 % 33

Female 37.5 % 37.5 % 12.5 % 12.5 % 8

Total 23 11 4 3 41

Interpretation:Table b shows “Gender * Education * Age Cross tabulation” . It is being used to show the various counts of different combinations of a person from a particular gender, from a particular Age and from a particular Educational Background.For example: Under 20-22 Age category, male persons who have studied B. tech are 33.33 % of total 12 male persons.

Factor Analysis

Why?????

To determine the factors Influencing Selection of Management Colleges in India .

Variables

Industry Exposure

Location Alumni Network Accommodation

Diversity of students selected

Ranking Fees Co curriculum

PlacementsCourses available/ subjects

Faculty qualification

Infrastructure

Quality of students

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha

Based on

Standardized

Items

N of Items

.735 .733 13

Table 1 > 0.6 Consistency

As it can observed from the table 1.a below the Cronbach’s Alpha value of 0.746 is greater than 0.6. This indicates satisfactory internal consistencyreliability of the questionnaire. So, factor analysis can be done on the responses for the analysis.

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling

Adequacy..562

Bartlett's Test of

Sphericity

Approx. Chi-Square 181.642

df 78

Sig. .000

Table 2

Interpretation of the test:As the KMO value (.562) is greater than 0.5 and the Bartlett's Test of Sphericity(0.00) is significant i.e. less than 0.5, factor analysis can be used to do the data reduction of the given set of data values.

Rotated Component Matrix

Component

1 2 3 4 5

Industry Exposure.648

Location .841

Alumni Network.876

Accommodation.737

Diversity of students

selected

Ranking .548

Fees -.791

Co curriculum.752

Placements .745

Courses available/

subjects

.622

Faculty qualification.662

Infrastructure .702

Quality of students.823

Total 2.961 2.253 1.511 1.259 1.250

% of Variance22.775 17.331 11.623 9.688 9.613

Cumulative %22.775 40.105 51.728 61.416 71.030

Table 3

Naming of Factors

Factors Variables Factor Loadings

Curriculum and image

Accommodation .737

Ranking .548

Co curriculum .752

Courses available/ subjects .622

Infrastructure .702

Intellectual level and placements

Placements .662

Faculty qualification .745

Quality of students .823

Investment and exposure Industry Exposure .648

Fees -.791

Alumni Network Alumni Network .876

Location Location .841

Table 4

• Interpretation: The eigen values are 2.961, 2.253, 1.511, 1.259 and 1.250. The percentages of variance showed by these factors are 22.775, 17.331, 11.623, 9.688 and 9.613 respectively. Overall 71.030 % of variation among the variables has been captured by these major 5 factors.

Association of demographics

&

the factors

ANOVA

To identify the degree of association between demographic variables and identified factors.

ANOVA

Gender vs Factors

Table 6 ANOVA

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

CURRICULUM AND

IMAGE

Between Groups .001 1 .001 .002 .969

Within Groups 16.052 40 .401

Total 16.053 41

INTELLECTUAL LEVEL

AND PLACEMENTS

Between Groups 1.143 1 1.143 1.324 .257

Within Groups 35.410 41 .864

Total 36.553 42

INVESTMENT AND

EXPOSURE

Between Groups .007 1 .007 .019 .890

Within Groups 14.689 40 .367

Total 14.696 41

ALUMNI NETWORK

Between Groups 1.536 1 1.536 3.360 .074

Within Groups 18.743 41 .457

Total 20.279 42

LOCATION

Between Groups .168 1 .168 .172 .680

Within Groups 40.018 41 .976

Total 40.186 42

• Interpretation:

• As we can see from the above ANOVA table the significance values for all the factors are greater than 0.05.

• So the there is no significant difference between the responses on gender variable.

• We can say that both the males and females have responded in similar way.

GenderTable 5 Descriptives

N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Minimum Maximum

Lower Bound Upper Bound

CURRICULUM

AND IMAGE

Male 34 3.8235 .64737 .11102 3.5977 4.0494 2.33 5.00

Female 8 3.8333 .56344 .19920 3.3623 4.3044 2.67 4.67

Total 42 3.8254 .62573 .09655 3.6304 4.0204 2.33 5.00

INTELLECTUAL

LEVEL AND

PLACEMENTS

Male 35 3.0857 .96115 .16246 2.7555 3.4159 1.00 4.67

Female 8 2.6667 .75593 .26726 2.0347 3.2986 1.00 3.33

Total 43 3.0078 .93290 .14227 2.7206 3.2949 1.00 4.67

INVESTMENT

AND EXPOSURE

Male 34 3.4706 .61473 .10543 3.2561 3.6851 2.00 4.50

Female 8 3.4375 .56300 .19905 2.9668 3.9082 2.50 4.00

Total 42 3.4643 .59871 .09238 3.2777 3.6509 2.00 4.50

ALUMNI

NETWORK

Male 35 4.4857 .65849 .11131 4.2595 4.7119 3.00 5.00

Female 8 4.0000 .75593 .26726 3.3680 4.6320 3.00 5.00

Total 43 4.3953 .69486 .10597 4.1815 4.6092 3.00 5.00

LOCATION

Male 35 3.7143 1.01667 .17185 3.3650 4.0635 2.00 5.00

Female 8 3.8750 .83452 .29505 3.1773 4.5727 2.00 5.00

Total 43 3.7442 .97817 .14917 3.4432 4.0452 2.00 5.00

• Interpretation:

• As we have found from ANOVA test there was no significant difference between responses on gender variables.

• We can also observe the means of both male and females are in the same range for all 5 factors which justifies no significant difference.

ANOVA

Age vs Factors

Table 8 ANOVA

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

CURRICULUM AND

IMAGE

Between Groups 1.693 3 .564 1.493 .232

Within Groups 14.360 38 .378

Total 16.053 41

INTELLECTUAL LEVEL

AND PLACEMENTS

Between Groups 1.075 3 .358 .394 .758

Within Groups 35.478 39 .910

Total 36.553 42

INVESTMENT AND

EXPOSURE

Between Groups .309 3 .103 .272 .845

Within Groups 14.387 38 .379

Total 14.696 41

ALUMNI NETWORK

Between Groups .523 3 .174 .344 .794

Within Groups 19.756 39 .507

Total 20.279 42

LOCATION

Between Groups .273 3 .091 .089 .966

Within Groups 39.913 39 1.023

Total 40.186 42

• Interpretation:

• As we can see from the above ANOVA table the the significance values for all the factors are greater than 0.05.

• So the there is no significant difference between the responses on age variable.

• We can say that all age groups have responded in similar way.

AgeTable 7 Descriptives

N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for

Mean

Minimum Maximum

Lower Bound Upper Bound

CURRICULUM

AND IMAGE

20-22 17 3.9608 .52549 .12745 3.6906 4.2310 2.67 5.00

23-25 23 3.7971 .67224 .14017 3.5064 4.0878 2.33 5.00

26-28 1 3.0000 . . . . 3.00 3.00

Above 28 1 3.0000 . . . . 3.00 3.00

Total 42 3.8254 .62573 .09655 3.6304 4.0204 2.33 5.00

INTELLECTUAL

LEVEL AND

PLACEMENTS

20-22 18 3.0000 .97014 .22866 2.5176 3.4824 1.00 4.67

23-25 23 3.0580 .94094 .19620 2.6511 3.4649 1.00 4.67

26-28 1 3.0000 . . . . 3.00 3.00

Above 28 1 2.0000 . . . . 2.00 2.00

Total 43 3.0078 .93290 .14227 2.7206 3.2949 1.00 4.67

INVESTMENT

AND

EXPOSURE

20-22 17 3.5294 .51450 .12478 3.2649 3.7939 2.50 4.50

23-25 23 3.4348 .67931 .14165 3.1410 3.7285 2.00 4.50

26-28 1 3.5000 . . . . 3.50 3.50

Above 28 1 3.0000 . . . . 3.00 3.00

Total 42 3.4643 .59871 .09238 3.2777 3.6509 2.00 4.50

ALUMNI

NETWORK

20-22 18 4.3889 .77754 .18327 4.0022 4.7756 3.00 5.00

23-25 23 4.3913 .65638 .13686 4.1075 4.6751 3.00 5.00

26-28 1 4.0000 . . . . 4.00 4.00

Above 28 1 5.0000 . . . . 5.00 5.00

Total 43 4.3953 .69486 .10597 4.1815 4.6092 3.00 5.00

LOCATION

20-22 18 3.6667 .97014 .22866 3.1842 4.1491 2.00 5.00

23-25 23 3.7826 1.04257 .21739 3.3318 4.2335 2.00 5.00

26-28 1 4.0000 . . . . 4.00 4.00

Above 28 1 4.0000 . . . . 4.00 4.00

Total 43 3.7442 .97817 .14917 3.4432 4.0452 2.00 5.00

• Interpretation:

• As we have found from ANOVA test there was no significant difference between responses on age variables.

• We can also observe the means of various age categories are in the same range for all 5 factors which justifies no significant difference.

ANOVA

Education Background vs Factors

Table 09 ANOVA

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

CURRICULUM AND

IMAGE

Between Groups 4.708 3 1.569 5.687 .003Within Groups 9.934 36 .276

Total 14.642 39

INTELLECTUAL LEVEL

AND PLACEMENTS

Between Groups 1.566 3 .522 .637 .596

Within Groups 30.326 37 .820

Total 31.892 40

INVESTMENT AND

EXPOSURE

Between Groups .525 3 .175 .459 .713

Within Groups 13.719 36 .381

Total 14.244 39

ALUMNI NETWORK

Between Groups .066 3 .022 .041 .989

Within Groups 19.690 37 .532

Total 19.756 40

LOCATION

Between Groups .779 3 .260 .248 .862

Within Groups 38.782 37 1.048

Total 39.561 40

• Interpretation:

• As we can see from the above ANOVA table the the significance values for all the factors except Curriculum and Image are greater than 0.05.

• So for Curriculum and Image there is significant difference between the responses on Education variable.

Education BackgroundTable 09 Descriptives

N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for

Mean

Minimum Maximum

Lower Bound Upper Bound

CURRICULUM

AND IMAGE

B.Tech 23 3.5797 .55247 .11520 3.3408 3.8186 2.33 4.33

B. Com 11 4.2727 .51247 .15452 3.9284 4.6170 3.67 5.00

BBA 3 4.4444 .50918 .29397 3.1796 5.7093 4.00 5.00

B. Sc 3 3.8889 .19245 .11111 3.4108 4.3670 3.67 4.00

Total 40 3.8583 .61272 .09688 3.6624 4.0543 2.33 5.00

INTELLECTUAL

LEVEL AND

PLACEMENTS

B.Tech 23 3.0435 .88366 .18426 2.6614 3.4256 1.00 4.33

B. Com 11 3.3030 .86223 .25997 2.7238 3.8823 2.33 4.67

BBA 4 2.5833 1.06719 .53359 .8852 4.2815 1.00 3.33

B. Sc 3 3.1111 1.07152 .61864 .4493 5.7729 2.33 4.33

Total 41 3.0732 .89291 .13945 2.7913 3.3550 1.00 4.67

INVESTMENT

AND EXPOSURE

B.Tech 23 3.5652 .62712 .13076 3.2940 3.8364 2.00 4.50

B. Com 10 3.4000 .61464 .19437 2.9603 3.8397 2.50 4.00

BBA 4 3.5000 .70711 .35355 2.3748 4.6252 2.50 4.00

B. Sc 3 3.1667 .28868 .16667 2.4496 3.8838 3.00 3.50

Total 40 3.4875 .60434 .09555 3.2942 3.6808 2.00 4.50

ALUMNI

NETWORK

B.Tech 23 4.3913 .72232 .15061 4.0790 4.7037 3.00 5.00

B. Com 11 4.3636 .80904 .24393 3.8201 4.9072 3.00 5.00

BBA 4 4.5000 .57735 .28868 3.5813 5.4187 4.00 5.00

B. Sc 3 4.3333 .57735 .33333 2.8991 5.7676 4.00 5.00

Total 41 4.3902 .70278 .10976 4.1684 4.6121 3.00 5.00

LOCATION

B.Tech 23 3.8261 .98406 .20519 3.4005 4.2516 2.00 5.00

B. Com 11 3.5455 .82020 .24730 2.9944 4.0965 2.00 5.00

BBA 4 3.7500 1.25831 .62915 1.7478 5.7522 2.00 5.00

B. Sc 3 4.0000 1.73205 1.00000 -.3027 8.3027 2.00 5.00

Total 41 3.7561 .99450 .15531 3.4422 4.0700 2.00 5.00

• Interpretation:

• As we have found from ANOVA test there was significant difference between responses on education variables.

• We can see the mean value of respondents who choose BBA as their educational background is 4.44 which is more than other category respondents.

• So respondents have favorably responded towards BBA on education variable.

ANOVA

Annual Household Income vs Factors

Table 11 ANOVA

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

CURRICULUM AND

IMAGE

Between Groups 1.570 3 .523 1.339 .276

Within Groups 14.457 37 .391

Total 16.027 40

INTELLECTUAL LEVEL

AND PLACEMENTS

Between Groups 1.812 3 .604 .663 .580

Within Groups 34.622 38 .911

Total 36.434 41

INVESTMENT AND

EXPOSURE

Between Groups .614 3 .205 .577 .634

Within Groups 13.130 37 .355

Total 13.744 40

ALUMNI NETWORK

Between Groups 1.028 3 .343 .682 .568

Within Groups 19.091 38 .502

Total 20.119 41

LOCATION

Between Groups 1.505 3 .502 .494 .689

Within Groups 38.614 38 1.016

Total 40.119 41

• Interpretation:

• As we can see from the above ANOVA table the the significance values for all the factors are greater than 0.05.

• So the there is no significant difference between the responses on Income variable.

• We can say that all income groups have responded in similar way.

Annual Household IncomeTable 10 Descriptives

N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Minimum Maximum

Lower Bound Upper Bound

CURRICULUM AND

IMAGE

Up to 3 Lakhs 5 4.1333 .96032 .42947 2.9409 5.3257 2.67 5.00

3-5 lakhs 12 4.0278 .50168 .14482 3.7090 4.3465 3.00 5.00

5-8 Lakhs 12 3.6667 .61955 .17885 3.2730 4.0603 2.33 4.67

Above 8 Lakhs 12 3.6667 .58603 .16917 3.2943 4.0390 2.67 4.67

Total 41 3.8293 .63299 .09886 3.6295 4.0291 2.33 5.00

INTELLECTUAL LEVEL

AND PLACEMENTS

Up to 3 Lakhs 5 2.8000 1.69312 .75719 .6977 4.9023 1.00 4.67

3-5 lakhs 12 3.1944 .75823 .21888 2.7127 3.6762 2.00 4.67

5-8 Lakhs 12 2.7500 1.05529 .30464 2.0795 3.4205 1.00 4.33

Above 8 Lakhs 13 3.1795 .61787 .17137 2.8061 3.5529 2.33 4.33

Total 42 3.0159 .94267 .14546 2.7221 3.3096 1.00 4.67

INVESTMENT AND

EXPOSURE

Up to 3 Lakhs 5 3.4000 .65192 .29155 2.5905 4.2095 2.50 4.00

3-5 lakhs 11 3.6818 .51346 .15481 3.3369 4.0268 3.00 4.50

5-8 Lakhs 12 3.3750 .71111 .20528 2.9232 3.8268 2.00 4.50

Above 8 Lakhs 13 3.4615 .51887 .14391 3.1480 3.7751 2.50 4.00

Total 41 3.4878 .58617 .09154 3.3028 3.6728 2.00 4.50

ALUMNI NETWORK

Up to 3 Lakhs 5 4.6000 .54772 .24495 3.9199 5.2801 4.00 5.00

3-5 lakhs 12 4.3333 .65134 .18803 3.9195 4.7472 3.00 5.00

5-8 Lakhs 12 4.5833 .66856 .19300 4.1586 5.0081 3.00 5.00

Above 8 Lakhs 13 4.2308 .83205 .23077 3.7280 4.7336 3.00 5.00

Total 42 4.4048 .70051 .10809 4.1865 4.6231 3.00 5.00

LOCATION

Up to 3 Lakhs 5 3.8000 1.09545 .48990 2.4398 5.1602 2.00 5.00

3-5 lakhs 12 3.9167 .90034 .25990 3.3446 4.4887 2.00 5.00

5-8 Lakhs 12 3.8333 1.02986 .29729 3.1790 4.4877 2.00 5.00

Above 8 Lakhs 13 3.4615 1.05003 .29123 2.8270 4.0961 2.00 5.00

Total 42 3.7381 .98920 .15264 3.4298 4.0464 2.00 5.00

• Interpretation:

• As we have found from ANOVA test there was no significant difference between responses on income variable.

• We can also observe the means of all the income groups are in the same range for all 5 factors which justifies no significant difference.

Than

k yo

u..

....

...