Upload
rishi-patel
View
68
Download
4
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
A
COMPREHENSIVE PROJECT REPORTON
“TO STUDY NEED ASSESSMENT OF INDUSTRIAL WATER PURIFIERS”
Submitted to
S.R. LUTHRA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENT OF THE AWARD FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
In
Gujarat Technological UniversityUNDER THE GUIDANCE OF
Faculty Guide: Company Guide:
Mr. Harshesh Patel Mr. Abhishek Trivedi
Asst. Professor Deputy Divisional Manager
(Eureka Forbes Ltd)
Submitted byMs. Ami Patel [Batch No. 2014-16, Enrollment No. 148050592044]
Mr. Nilesh Rathod [Batch No. 2014-16, Enrollment No. 148050592061]
MBA SEMESTER IV
S.R. LUTHRA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT –805MBA PROGRAMME
Affiliated to Gujarat Technological University
Ahmedabad
APRIL, 2016
COMPANY CERTIFICATE
This certificated that Mr. Nilesh Rathod and Ms. Ami Patel from S.R LUTHARA
INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT and carrying out research on the subject title
“To Study Need Assessment of Industrial Water Purifier” and in under the
supervision of Mr. Abhishek Trivedi from September 2015 to April 2016 I also
certify that the above mentioned student have work satisfactory.
Place:
Date:
For,
Eureka Forbes Ltd.
Authorized Signatory
Students’ Declaration
We, Ms. Ami Patel & Mr. Nilesh Rathod, hereby declare that the report for
Comprehensive Project entitled “To Study Need Assessment of Industry Water Purifier” is a result of our own work and our indebtedness to other work
publications, references, if any, have been duly acknowledged.
Place: Surat
Date: _____________
__________________(Ami Patel)
__________________(Nilesh Rathod)
Institute’s Certificate
Certified that this Comprehensive Project Report Titled “To Study Need Assessment of Industrial Water Purifier” is the bonafide work of Ms. Ami Patel
(Enrollment No. 148050592044) and Mr. Nilesh Rathod (Enrollment
No.148050592061), who carried out the research under my supervision. I also
certify further, that to the best of my knowledge the work reported herein does not
form part of any other project report or dissertation on the basis of which a
degree or award was conferred on an earlier occasion on this or any other
candidate.
Place: Surat
Date: ________________
___________________
(Harshesh Patel)
Asst. Professor
___________________
(J.M. Kapadia)
Director
PREFACE
Master of Business Administration is a challenging profession, in which require adept (skills), and practical knowledge of business affair and
account. For this purpose, practical training is most helpful.
We received our training at Eureka Forbes Ltd, Surat as a requirement of MBA
curriculum. This training has provided us clear insight of the application of
theoretical knowledge into practical scenario. To target the respondent, it is
imperative to understand their mind set and preference toward the industrial
water purify.
The study aims to understand the need of water purifier of manufacturing unit or
companies from industrial sector. Knowing the need of customers is the key to
success for any company. Eureka Forbes is also one of them who successfully
understood the need of customer over a period of time.
Our project report is “To Analyze Need Assessment of Industrial Water Purify”is under the supervision of Mr. Abhishek Trivedi or time period of training
is September 2015 to April 2016.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We have taken efforts in this project. However, it would not have been possible
without the kind support and help of many individuals and organizations. We
would like to extend our sincere thanks to all of them.
We are highly indebted toMr. Sunil Yadav, and Mr. Abhishek Trivedi for their
guidance and constant supervision as well as for providing necessary information
regarding the project & also for their support in completing the project.
We express our sincere thanks to Dr. J.M. Kapadia (Director, S. R. Luthra
Institute of Management) for providing necessary facilities and resources to carry
out this project. We are thankful for the beneficial advices and precious time
given by our guide Mr. Harshesh Patel (Assistant Professor, S. R. Luthra Institute
of Management).
We would like to express our gratitude towards our mentor & member of Eureka
Forbes for their kind co-operation and encouragement.
We would like to express our special gratitude and thanks to industry persons for
giving us such attention and time.
Our thanks and appreciations also go to our friends in developing the project and
people who have willingly helped us out with their abilities.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Need assessment is an important element that every organization follow so as to
develop an accurate plan for the success of an organization. The water
purification business in India is undergoing major changes, not just in terms of
technology but also in terms of pricing and competition. In it Eureka Forbes in
India is a leading water purifier company and also provide the facility of water
purification system, vacuum cleaner and air purifiers.
In this research first the analysis of the home appliance in water purify industry at
global, analyzes this market depending on its market segments, major
geographies, and current market trends. Geographies analyzed under this
research report include North America, AsiaPacific, Europe, Rest of the World.
The market for water purification was USD 85 billion in 2010 (only equipment and
products) and is growing on an average over 6–10 percent per year depending
on the country. The highest growth is to be expected in China with an annual
growth rate of over 15 percent followed by Brazil, South-East Asian countries,
and the Middle East.
Indian water purifier industry top 4 brand Aquaguard, zero B, whirlpool, Kent,
total value Rs.114244 crore and quality wise total 3627759 units. The monthly
retail audit covers 20% of the retail universe in 80 towns in India. In addition,
Market Pulse has carried out an extensive survey among 10,000 households in
62 towns to glean consumer behavior over the last few years. Water purifiers’
market size will touch a remarkable INR 61 billion in 2017.
Eureka Forbes is India's leader in water purification systems, vacuum cleaners
and air purifiers. Today, Eureka Forbes has not just spread health and happiness
across 20 million customers but also its employees.
Literature review has been done regarding need assessment, water purify,
industrial water purifies etc.…Our primary objective is to study need assessment
of industrial water purifier and the secondary objective is to understand the
requirement of mineral water among industrial users, to know expectations of
companies for water purifier as a product of Eureka Forbes, to study factors
influencing choices of water purifier among companies, to know future purchase
intention towards drinking water purifier of brand Aquvagard, to evaluate
industrial user’s attitude towards Aquaguard as the brand of water purifier and to
analyze their preference towards water purifier among companies.
This study uses descriptive research design, sample size for this study were 100
companies from different sector includes small, medium, and large size
companies in Surat city. Convenience sampling method was used to drag
samples from the population. Secondary data collected from various sources for
reviewing relevant literatures, Primary data collected by structured and interview
method, survey method used for collection of primary data. Data collection tool
used was structured questionnaire. Data were analyzed by various analytical
approaches like simple percentage, frequency, and statistical tests like Chi
Square, ANOVA by using SPSS software.
From the analysis it was found that most of the clients were using filtered water
for drinking purpose while some clients were using filtered water for
manufacturing purpose and some of the clients were using both manufacturing
and drinking purpose. It was revealed that removal of TDS & Hardness, and
Removal of bacterial Contaminations were important factors in selecting water
purifier. Less maintenance, Better Taste of water, and competitive prices were
important factors considered by clients. Most of the clients of Eureka Forbs were
satisfied with Eureka Forbs products.
In this study conclude that most of the industry use of purifier water but some use
of local bottle water and some used Eureka Forbes. Some industry own plan of
water and other used of different brand.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Sr. No.
Particulars Page No.
1. Introduction 12. Home Appliance Industry Profile 4
a. Globalb. Nationalc. Stated. PESTELe. Current trendsf. Major Playersg. Major Offerings
451112131417
4
3. Eureka Forbes Profilea. Company Profileb. Organogramc. Divisions/ Departmentsd. SWOTe. Market Position
1920212223
19
4. Review of Literature 265. Research Methodology 36
a. Problem Statementb. Research Objectivec. Research Design
i. Type of Designii. Samplingiii. Data Collectioniv. Tools for Analysisv. Limitations of the Study
363637
6. Data analysis & Interpretations 39 397. Findings 60 608. Conclusion 62 629. Recommendations 64 64
BibliographyAnnexure
LIST OFTABLES
Sr. No.
Particulars Tables No.
Page No.
1 Usage of water purifier (%) 6.1 39
2 Types of Manufacturing Unit (%) 6.2 40
3 Employee’s Working in Organization (%) 6.3 41
4 Usage of water for drinking per day 6.4 42
5 Using any water purifier for drinking (%) 6.5 43
6 Capacity of the purifier (%) 6.6 44
7 Factors affected in selection of water purifier (%) 6.7 45
8 Level of importance in (%) 6.8 46
9 Using water purifier of Eureka Forbes (%) 6.9 47
10 Water purifier are you using (%) 6.10 48
11 Reason for ticked above brand (%) 6.11 49
12 Ever used water purifier of Eureka Forbes (%) 6.12 50
13 In future, will you bay water purifier of Eureka
Forbes
6.13 51
14 Number of years are using water purifierof Eureka
Forbes
6.14 52
15 Usage experience of water purifier for Eureka
Forbes
6.15 53
16 Satisfaction with the Eureka Forbes 6.16 54
17 State the reason for not using water purifier(%) 6.17 55
18 Like to go for water purifier in future (%) 6.18 56
19 Cross Tabulation of Variable 6.19 57
20 Chi-Square Tests 6.20 57
21 ANOVA 6.21 58
22 Test of Homogeneity of Variances 6.22 58
23 Number of years you are using water purifier of
Eureka Forbes
6.23 59
24 Test of Homogeneity of Variances 6.24 59
LIST OF FIGURES
Sr. No. ParticularsFigure No.
Page No.
1 Purify M/c 1.1 3
2 Top five water purify 1.2 6
3 Top 4 brand in Ro based water purify 1.3 6
4 Top 4 brands UV based purifiers 1.4 9
5 Top 4 brands Offline based purifier 1.5 9
6 Organogram of Eureka Forbs 1.6 20
7 Organization Structure of Eureka Forbs 1.7 21
8 Usage of water purifier (%) 6.1 39
9 Types of Manufacturing Unit (%) 6.2 40
10 Employee’s Working in Organization (%) 6.3 41
11 Usage of water for drinking per day 6.4 42
12 Using any water purifier for drinking (%) 6.5 43
13 Capacity of the purifier (%) 6.6 44
14 Factors affected in selection of water purifier (%) 6.7 45
15 Level of importance in (%) 6.8 46
16 Using water purifier of Eureka Forbes (%) 6.9 47
17 Water purifier are you using (%) 6.10 48
18 Reason for ticked above brand (%) 6.11 49
19 Ever used water purifier of Eureka Forbes (%) 6.12 50
20 In future, will you bay water purifier of Eureka Forbes 6.13 51
21 Number of years are using water purifierof Eureka Forbes 6.14 52
22 Usage experience of water purifier for Eureka Forbes 6.15 53
23 Satisfaction with the Eureka Forbes 6.16 54
24 State the reason for not using water purifier(%) 6.17 55
25 Like to go for water purifier in future (%) 6.18 56
CHAPTER1
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
DefinitionA Needs Assessment is a process used by organizations to determine priorities,
make organizational improvements, or allocate resources. It involves determining
the needs, or gaps, between where the organization envisions itself in the future
and the organization's current state. You then develop a plan of action to address
the needs (or closing the gaps) to bring the organization closer to its desired
future state.
Example
Let's look at an example. Imagine that you are the president of an auto
manufacturing company. You want to increase your company's market share
over the next five years. Unfortunately, the latest marketing data shows that your
company actually suffered a slight decrease in market share last quarter. It's time
to perform a needs assessment, so you gather your brain trust.
The purpose of a Needs Assessment is to: Understand the extent of the problem.
Gather the information about all the services that are available to your
target population.
Identify the gaps in the services available to your target population.
A needs assessment is also a great opportunity to involve current or potential
program participants in the planning process. Ask them about their needs and
about what gaps they see in the services available to them. This will help you
design a program that is truly responsive to your target population.
The World Health Organization declares that needs assessments contribute to
planning and delivering the most effective care to those in greatest need. Further
they should be grounded in principles of equity and social justice and ensure that
scarce resources are allocated where they can give maximum benefit.
Additionally, they must be informed by community members beyond completion
of surveys, through community based participatory research and action.
Organizations must engage the community in a democratic process which
increases members’ knowledge and ownership of activities, policies and
procedures. These outcomes create an environment where consumers have
better access to information while enhancing trust in the services and the
organization’s legitimacy.
Water Purification is the process of removing undesirable chemicals, biological
contaminants, suspended solids and gases from contaminated water. The goal is
to produce water fit for a specific purpose.
The aims of the treatment are to remove unwanted constituents in the water and
to make it safe to drink or fit for a specific purpose in industry or medical
applications. Widely varied techniques are available to remove contaminants like
fine solids, micro-organisms and some dissolved inorganic and organic materials,
or environmental persistent pharmaceutical pollutants. The choice of method will
depend on the quality of the water being treated, the cost of the treatment
process and the quality standards expected of the processed water.
The processes below are the ones commonly used in water purification plants.
Some or most may not be used depending on the scale of the plant and quality of
the raw (source) water Industrial Water Purifier
Eureka Forbes are among the well acknowledged and renowned companies
dealing in the manufacturing and supplying of Industrial Water Purifier. They
offer their clients a comprehensive range of quality water purifiers and power
supply products at economical prices and within the specific time frame. The
products offered by the company are immensely acclaimed and demanded in the
industry for being superior in quality and some exceptional features like optimum
performance, corrosion resistance, robust construction, long functional life and
many more. It’s water purifiers and power supply products can also be availed
from us in a customized form as per the specifications.
Features:
Advanced technology
Convenient
Affordable price
Specifications:
Removes dirt, rust & sediment 99%
Self-encapsulated filter cartridges
1,500-gallon capacity (5,678 liters)
Figure No: 1.1 Purify M/c
CHAPTER 2
HOME APPLIANCE INDUSTRY PROFILE
Global Level of home appliance industryPer capita income increasing of consumers coupled with the concern for health is
driving the water purifier market globally. According to The World Water
Organization (a U.S.-based non-profit association), around 1 billion global
populations in 2012 did not have access to safe drinking water. With continuous
improvements in lifestyle and increasing health concerns, safe drinking water has
emerged as a necessity. A large section of the population in developed and
developing economies is consuming untreated water, thus giving rise to water-
borne diseases. However, with increasing per capita income in these countries,
consumption of treated water is rising considerably. Industry participants are
foraying into low-cost water treatment solutions and devices including offline
water purifiers which are targeted at the low-income consumer groups.
The global water purifier market is expected to witness a double-digit growth
during 2013-2019. Asia Pacific has become the biggest market for water
purifiers. China and India, with their large population coupled with the lack of
hygienic infrastructure, provide large untapped markets. This acts as major
growth driver for the industry. Water purifiers are broadly categorized under two
segments: online and offline. While the online water purifiers require electricity for
their functioning, offline systems work without it. Offline systems (non-electric)
are expected to increase industry penetration in the rural markets due to their
lower costs. Among the end-user segments, the household segment holds the
largest share. Some of the major companies operating in the water purifier
market are Brita, PUR, Aquasana, Aqua America, Pentair and Panasonic.
This research report analyzes this market depending on its market segments,
major geographies, and current market trends. Geographies analyzed under this
research report include
North America
Asia Pacific
Europe
Rest of the World
National level of home appliance industryThe water purification businessin India is undergoing major changes, not just in
terms of technology, but also in terms of pricing and competition. Innovation and
product differentiation seem to be the key mantras in the business. The drivers
include scarcity of clean drinking water, low penetration of water purifiers,
increasing urbanization, and waterborne diseases, while challenges faced are the
lack of standards and low awareness levels. There would be tie-ups for
enhancing distribution, increasing product portfolio, and rural expansion.
Competitive landscape identifies major players in the market. The market has
also started evolving in the offline category for consumers who do not have
access to running water and electricity and at a lower price point. With the market
opening up, itis only helping a larger base of India get water purifiers.
As per World Bank, 80 percent of communicable diseases in India are water
related. With the population size of1.17 billion, only less than 15 percent people
have access to safe drinking water. It is estimated that about 10million illnesses
and 700,000 deaths in India could be attributed to diarrhea of which 400,000 are
children under the age of five. Moreover, due to over exploitation of ground
water, the levels of mineral contaminants such as arsenic and fluoride in water
drawn from wells have increased dramatically. About 50 million people in West
Bangalore presently affected by arsenic poisoning while an additional 70 million
people are affected in neighboring Bangladesh, which according to the World
Health Organization (WHO) is the largest mass poisoning in human history. In
addition, about 60 million people across India, mainly in Rajasthan, Gujarat, and
Andhra Pradesh, consume water with high fluoride content. Given the gravity of
the situation, there is an urgent need for deploying technologies for removing
microbiological, arsenic, and fluoride contamination from drinking water before it
is consumed.
Figure No: 1.2 Top five water purify
Figure No: 1.3 Top 4 brand in Ro based water purify
Nearly 30 percent of rural India has no access to safe drinking water. Awareness
of health risks linked to unsafe water is still low among the rural population. But
the rising prosperity in rural India means people may be willing to pay more for
safe water. One clear indicator is the thrust that conventional packaged water
companies such as Parle Bislleri and Coca-Cola are giving to rural distribution.
Governments too are now willing to work with private parties. For instance,
California-based Water Health International is in the process of setting up 225
water treatment plants for panchayat blocks in Andhra Pradesh on a build-own-
operate-transfer (BOOT) basis. Water Health will make its money from user fees.
There certainly exists an opportunity. But it is a long haul. A number of things
from the business model to community acceptance of safe water for a price have
to fall into place for these ventures to turn into stable, sustainable operations. The
period and amount of returns are uncertain and most companies are still nascent.
As more households switch to water purifiers, there is an urgent need for
stringent standards for the equipment. In India, unlike producers of natural
mineral water and packaged drinking water, who are required to meet Bureau of
Indian Standards (BIS) norms, there is no such mechanism for ensuring safety of
potable water purification devices.
Some leading consumer organization sin India observed the World Water Day in
Delhi to attract the attention of the government, policy makers, and media to
ensure access to safe potable drinking water to the citizens and take immediate
steps to bring reforms in its distribution in an equitable manner. They believe the
domestic water purifier market is aggressively marketing the chemical-based
technology to purify water, which is a serious public health issue. There is also a
huge unorganized market in India, which is misleading the consumers. There are
no regulatory mechanisms mandated to check the standard of water consumed
by the ignorant and helpless consumers.
The use of chemicals including chlorine in these purifiers should be carefully
governed and regularly monitored to ensure that the dosage is administered
under safe level. Also some other chemicals used in the cleaning process by
these purifiers decompose themselves during filtration
and treatment of water and produce products which when combined with other
routinely used material can be harmful to health. There is also a growing fear that
water will be cornered by the highest bidder to be sold to those who can afford to
pay, leaving large parts of India outside the net. Does this mean that people who
cannot afford are destined not to get safe water?
Market DynamicsThe Indian water purifier market is on a high growth trajectory. It is estimated at
Rs. `2000 crore with total sales of about 5 million units. TV Veopar for the sake of
total accuracy has considered top 5 brands, which together constitute3,627,759
numbers, estimated at Rs. `1142.44 crore. The five brands are Aquaguard,
Hindustan Unilever Limited, Kent, Zero B, and Whirlpool. Eureka Forbes has the
highest turnover in the segment, estimated at over`510 crore. It is present in all
the three categories – RO based, inline/UV based, and offline purifiers –through
its brand AquaSure.Hindustan Unilever Limited dominates the offline water
purifiers market and has some presence in the inline category with Marvella OGT
and Auto fill purifiers. Its turnover from water purifiers division is estimated at
`300 crore. Kent with its focus primarily on the premium RO-based purifiers had a
sales turnover of Rs.`240 crore in 2010-11. Kent moves ahead with its vision
toward making the world a healthy and happy family.
Figure No: 1.4 Top 4 brands UV based purifiers
Figure No: 1.5 Top 4 brands Offline based purifier
Breakthrough in Technology
Researchers at the North Carolina State University have developed a new
material that can remove radioactive contaminants from drinking water, a
discovery that could help Japan deal with its unfolding water crisis. The new
material is made of forest byproducts and crustacean shells.
The material works like foam. It absorbs water and can soak up contaminants in
water and salt from seawater. In future, the new material could be packaged in a
small bag or it can be used as a filter to clean up large areas. As we are currently
seeing in Japan, one of the major health risks posed by nuclear accidents is
radioactive iodide that dissolves in drinking water. Because it is chemically
identical to non-radioactive iodide, the human body cannot distinguish it – which
is what allows it to accumulate in thyroid and eventually lead to cancer.
The newly developed material binds iodide in water and traps it, which can then
be properly disposed of without risk to humans or the environment. Not only can
the new material remove radioactive iodine, but can also strip heavy metals like
arsenic from drinking water. If the materialist eventually used in disaster
situations, it could help clean water when there is no electricity source to tap.
The current situation in Japan is a good example of how this material might help
clean up the water supply. Water availability is a major issue in many parts of the
world; not only drinking water demands are increasing but also water is
invaluable for the industry and community uses. Currently in India, every
company is striving to make its products available at different price brackets, thus
making it possible to provide safe drinking water to every Indian.
State level of home appliances industryThe poor water quality in Gujarat has become a concern for many, but at the
same time it has come as a boon for the domestic water purifier market. The
state, which currently holds an estimated 30 per cent of the total national
domestic purifier business, is growing at a rapid pace as more national and
international players are entering the sector. This rapid growth is pushing Gujarat
to become the next hub for India’s water purification market.
Talking of Gujarat as the regional hub for the Indian water market, COO of India
Water Expo, a three-day event that began on Thursday at Gujarat University
Convention Hall, H Subramaniam said, “The boom in industrial growth in the
state over the past years has not only added to the Government, which recently
has given special focus on water supply through investments in major projects for
SEZs and industrial estates has been very supportive in attracting more players
for setting up their own manufacturing and water treatment plants. Also, a lot of
companies are putting up their design and engineering units here.
According to industry estimates, due to extreme scarcity, salinity in water and
diminishing ground water level, there is a surge in demand for water treatment
products in the domestic segment. The water demand has increased up to 1500
milliliter per day (ml/d) compared to 700 ml/d in 1986 due to expeditious growth in
population compared to the demand for water, including drinking water.
Increase in wastewater generation, but also to a rise in water demand. Gujarat is
emerging as the new hub for the water industry in the country. The water purifier
market in the state is worth Rs 3,000 crore out of the national total Rs 10,000
crore. Ahmedabad occupies 1/3rd of the total water business in the state, while
the remaining is shared between Surat, Vadodra and Rajkot.”
There are around 500 suppliers of domestic water systems in Gujarat. More and
more local, national and international players are entering the market for
manufacturing and supply of these products.
PESTEL AnalysisIn summary the key macro-level influences on the bottled drinking water market
are:
Political – the key factor is government spending cuts and the extent to which
thisaffects the economy and, therefore, consumer confidence as well as funding
andgrants available to start-ups.
Economic – the direct link between consumer confidence and sales of
discretionary purchases like bottled water means that the economic outlook is a
key influence on the demand and price paid for bottled water as previously
stated.
Social – clearly the research shows that social trends and behaviour is a key
area of Influence.
Technological – there are no particular technological influences. That said,
packaging material developments and also developments in areas such as
inventorytracking using RFID tags (Radio Frequency Identification) may come to
exert andinfluence.
Environmental – this is and will continue to be an area of influence on the
bottledwater market as evidenced by the responses of producers to issues such
as foodmiles and packaging waste.
Legal – the production of bottled water is well regulated and given the poor
environmental credentials there may well be future changes.
Current Trends in Home Appliance IndustryTrends & opportunities in the water purifier market
Market Pulse is the only firm in India that tracks kitchen appliances and select
domestic appliances on a monthly basis. The firm is a pioneer in water purifiers’
research and their retail audit reports are being used by industry leaders.
The monthly retail audit covers 20% of the retail universe in 80 towns in India. In
addition, Market Pulse has carried out an extensive survey among 10,000
households in 62 towns to glean consumer behavior over the last few years.
Data from more than 60% of the organized retail outlets as well as distributors,
franchisees and exclusive outlets has been analyzed too. The afore-mentioned
research activities have helped prepare a comprehensive report on the trends
and opportunities in the water purifier market in India. A few highlights of this
report are mentioned subsequently.
Major Players in Home Appliance Industry (Water Purifier)Water Purifier in recent time has become most essential home appliance as
quality of water has reduced resulting in numerous water borne diseases. Water
Purifier removes harmful elements like chemicals, microorganisms, impurities
and ensures clean and pure water.
Market is flooded with numerous water purifier brands and it’s really hard to find
the best one, so here is the list of Top 10 Best Water Purifier Brands in India:
1. KENTKent is the leading water purifier brand in India, which has earned the trust of
people by providing them with quality water purifiers that ensures clean and safe
water. Kent manufactures quality water purifiers and exports to Nepal,
Bangladesh, Kenya and many other countries.
Kent provides a complete range of water purifiers under the different categories
like UV Purifiers, Wall Mounted Purifiers, Gravity Based UF Purifiers and many
more. Kent Gold, Kent Prime, Kent Ultra and Kent Supreme are some of the
most selling variants of the Kent water purifier.
2. AQUAGUARDAquaguard is next on this list, which is one of the oldest water purifier brand and
dominated this segment for a long time. Aquaguard is a water purifier brand of
Eureka Forbes, an Indian healthcare Products Company founded in the year
1982 and presently one of the reliable companies for water purifiers.
Aquaguard comes packed with features like HD RO, Intelligent Alert Interface,
Intelligent Auto-Fill System and Silver Surety Technology, which makes it a
prominent choice for water purifier. Aquaguard Enhance RO+UV, Aquaguard
Magna, Aquaguard Reviva and Aquaguard Eternity are some of the most selling
variants of Aquaguard water purifier.
3. PUREITPureit is a water purifier brand of Hindustan Unilever and one of the most selling
water purifier brands in India with presence in more than 8 countries of the world.
Pureit Ultima RO+UV, Pureit Advanced, Pureit Classic and Pureit Marvell are
some of the most selling variants of Pureit water purifier.
4. AQUASUREAquasure stands at 4th in the list of top 10 best water purifier brands in India.
Aquasure is a water purifier brand owned by Eureka Forbes, an Indian company
known for its premier quality healthcare products.
Aquasure Aayush, Aquasure Shakti, Aquasure Xpert and Aquasure RO+UV are
some of the variants of the Aquasure water purifier.
5. AQUAFRESHNext on this list is Aquafresh, a water purifier brand of Aquafresh RO System, a
Delhi based company involved in manufacturing of water purifiers. Aquafresh
Super Grand, Aqua Pearl and Aquafresh Dolphin are some of the variants of
water purifier by Aquafresh.
6. ZERO BZero B is ranked 6th in list of top 10 best water purifier brands in India. Zero B is
a water purifier brand manufactured by Ion Exchange (India) Ltd, one of the
leading water treatment companies in India that exports its products to Africa,
Japan, Russia, UK, USA and many other countries.
Zero B offers a complete solution of water purification through its variants like
Sapphire, Emerald, Suraksha plus Pro, Ultimate and many more. Zero B has
captured a significant market share by offering best quality products at optimum
prices.
7. TATA SWACHTata Swach is a product of Tata, one of the oldest and largest business group in
India with presence in numerous countries in the world. Tata Swach uses TSRF
technology in which rice husk ash (RHA) with nano-silver particles are used for
purification of water.
Tata Swach Smart, Tata Swach Platina Silver RO, Tata Swach Nova Silver RO
and Tata Swach Silver Boost are some of the models of Tata Swach water
purifier.
8. LIVPURELivpure is a water purifier brand introduced by Luminous Water Technologies
Pvt. Ltd. to provide a complete water purification solution to consumers. Livpure
uses state-of-the-art technologies like UV, RO and UF for purification that
ensures clean and safe water.
Livpure Touch 2000 Plus, Livpure Magna, Livpure Envy Plus and Livpure PEP
are some of the models of Livpure water purifier.
9. NASAKANasaka is a brand of water purifier introduced in the year 2010 by Okaya, a
leading manufacturer of inverters and batteries in India. Nasaka uses Japanese
technology in its water purifiers to provide pure and safe drinking water.
Natura, Minjet, Xtra Sure and Nasaka 24X7 are some of the most selling variants
of Nasaka water purifier.
10. ELECTROLUXElectrolux is placed at 10th in list of top 10 best water purifier brands in India.
Electrolux water purifiers uses some of the best technologies like UF Process,
Double Purification Technology and Mineral Controller that makes it one of the
best water purifier brand available in the market.
Vogue, Ace and Sterling are the models of water purifier introduced by Electrolux
in the market.
Major Offering in Home Appliance Industry (Water Purifier)Market PotentialAccording to a recent UNICEF report, almost 67% of the Indian households do
not treat drinking water, even though it may be bacterially or chemically
contaminated. Consumers who do treat drinking water still rely largely on
traditional methods such as boiling.
In this scenario, water purifiers have witnessed accelerated growth over the last 5
years.This growth has been helped by the introduction of inexpensive offline or
gravity-based water purifiers in the range of Rs. 1000 – 2000. These purifiers
have penetrated the bottom of the pyramid households.
In total, 4.3 million water purifiers were sold in 2012 at an estimated value of INR
18.64 billion, and 70% of these were offline devices accounting for INR 5.6
billion. Reverse Osmosis or RO water purifiers were the biggest contributor to
this market, in value terms.
In the higher income households, competition for water purifiers comes from
packaged drinking water; almost 21% of these households prefer using packaged
water and do not use any water purifier.
Market GrowthWater purifiers’ market size will touch a remarkable INR 61 billion in 2017.
In 2012, RO was the fastest growing category, particularly in the North zone.
Modern retail also helped grow this category in the South zone.
Trends & Opportunities in the Water Purifiers Market 3 Key Players in the MarketIn the category of RO water purifiers, Kent and Eureka Forbes are the largest
players; they have a combined market share of more than 70%. In addition to
being the pioneers, they have developed the market by continuous expansion of
the distribution network and introduction of new products.
Pureit water purifiers from HUL have redefined the offline category and led the
explosive growth in the last 5 years. TATA Chemicals’ Swach is the other
significant player in this market.Aquasure and Aqua-Guard from Eureka Forbes
continue to dominate the UV water purifier’s category.
Likely Increase in CompetitionIn the near future, TTK Prestige is likely to launch a range of water purifiers in
collaboration with a foreign partner.Multi-level marketing companies such as
Tupperware and Amway have also launched offline water purifiers.
Distribution NetworkThe universe of outlets retailing water purifiers has grown rapidly to an estimated
21000 in urban India. Approximately, 30% of RO and UV are sold through the
‘direct to home’ channel. There is also an effort from established companies such
as Kent to open up exclusive branded outlets for their water purifiers. Higher
capacity purifiers has been preferred Premium products which rely on aesthetics
alone and do not offer any additional benefits are not preferred RO purifiers have
witnessed growth of inexpensive water purifiers like the ones from HUL. Premium
RO purifiers from Kent (Electrolux brand) are being introduced to thwart the entry
of Panasonic and LG. Over the last 2 years, the average selling prices have
increased the most for storage water purifiers (12%) followed by increased for UV
(9%) and RO (2%).
CHAPTER3
EUREKA FORBES LTD.
PROFILE
Introduction about Eureka Forbes Over 6000 employees, 941 service centers. A selling strategy that's a case study
at Harvard. Numerous awards including the Most Trusted Brand award: Platinum
Category by Reader's Digest, Asia's Most Admired Knowledge enterprise
(MAKE) award and the Most Admired Consumer Durable Company by premier
business publications. Not surprisingly, Eureka Forbes is India's leader in water
purification systems, vacuum cleaners and air purifiers. Today, Eureka Forbes
has not just spread health and happiness across 20 million customers but also its
employees.
As India's Best Employer, the Company strongly believes in the philosophy of
earning, learning, pride and fun. This includes revolutionary initiatives like the
Eureka Forbes Academy of Learning, which offers all employees an opportunity
to earn a Diploma in Sales Management by NMIMS, one of India's Premier
management institutes.
For 25 years now, Eureka Forbes has gifted health and happiness. Ensuring that
their products and services cater and bring joy to their customer for Life.
Eureka Forbes is the organization, which first introduced the concept of direct
selling in India.
Nowadays, Eureka Forbes is the pioneer market leader in India in water
purification systems (over 70% market share), vacuum cleaners (over 90%
market share) and air purifiers. Today it is India's largest direct selling
organization with a strong direct sales force of over 7,000 people.
Operating in over 100 Indian cities, Eureka Forbes has learnt a lot from these
diverse cultures across the Indian sub-continent. Eureka Forbes is present in 450
smaller towns through franchised direct operations and has a 3,800 strong dealer
network and more than 58 distributors in their strong institutional sales network.
In 2007, Eureka Forbes surpassed $ 200 Mio in sales for the first time.
OrganogramFigure No: 1.6 Organogram of Eureka ForbsEureka Forbes ltd.SalesMarketingAccountingCustomer RelationshipTechnology
Divisions/ DepartmentsFigure No:1.7 Organizational structure
SWOT Analysis1. Strengths
Strong brand image of Aquaguard
Benchmark for direct sales strategy Asian largest, direct selling company
Strong detailer sales network
The model also being the only water purifier to be introduced by the India
medical association
10 billion multi products multichannel co-corporation
Word class quality products
2. Weaknesses Service network in suburbs
Creating to unlimited costumer after Seles services
Falling short to service huge costumer bases
3. Opportunities Direct and taluka levels in rural market area.
By providing very strong service network in metros then there will be no
space for competitor
At international level
In institutional level
4. Threats General awareness in consumer
Competitors
Sometime source of water
Government policies
Sometime dealers or retailers not completely their responsibilities.
Market PositionFew years ago, a Eureka Forbes salesperson, also called a Euro champ, pointed
out to Mr. S. L. Goklaney that the quality of water supplied to Indian homes
varied through the day. The company subsequently launched a water purification
device, Aquaguard Sense, in 2008. The device, automatically detects impurities,
senses the water quality and adjusts itself to the level of purification required.
More recently, in July the company took an initiative to use refrigeration
techniques that condense water from atmospheric air in Mumbai. The technique
can generate 120 liters or 500 glasses of drinking water every day.
Still, experts feel that the company has been slow to change given the rapidly
changing market dynamics. Harminder Sahni of Wazir Advisors, a Gurgaon-
based retail consultancy, suggests that the company, known for its signature
water purifiers and vacuum cleaners, has to evolve rapidly to keep its nose
ahead of competition. "Whatever Eureka Forces is attempting had to be done
because as a company you cannot stop trying things," he says. The water purifier
business accounted for about 50 per cent of the company's revenues in fiscal
2012/13, the latest period for which figures are available. It is a leader in the Rs
3,400-crore market. The company has more than 70 per cent share in the
ultraviolet (UV) purifier market but is facing stiff competition in the fast growing
reverse osmosis (RO) segment from Kent RO Systems. Kent claims it is the
leader in the RO market with 40 to 45 per cent share.
Eureka Forbes says it has a 36 per cent market share. Meanwhile, several other
players have emerged as a threat to Eureka Forbes including Hindustan Unilever
(HUL), Nasaka, and Ion Exchange. "In recent years, while the market has grown
enormously, intense competition has significantly impacted the lead and
advantage that Eureka Forbes had. Both new businesses as well as repeat
revenues from existing customers have been hit," says Mr. Devangshu Dutta,
CEO of consulting firm Third Eyesight.
An issue for Eureka Forbes has been its reliance on direct sales. Its
salespersons (Euro champs) go from door-to-door conducting product
demonstrations and convincing people that their appliances are the best. Eureka
Forbes has an army of more than 8,000 Euro champs. However, with the
emergence of gated communities, cold calling as a strategy has not been as
effective.
It has forced the company to seek new ways of reaching out to customers. "The
challenge in the environment is how I get you to open the door with gated
communities," says Mr. S. L. Goklaney, adding that the company would never
look at disbanding its army of salespeople. "My core is my euro champs who
have built the brand over the years."
Companies such as Kent, HUL and several others are not just innovating but are
also retailing their products aggressively. Kent, for instance, has not just roped in
a celebrity (cine star Hema Malini) to endorse the brand, but has also unveiled
new products. It recently launched a water purification product, Kent Tap Guard
that cleans tap water and makes it safe for household use such as washing fruits
and vegetables. "The company is expanding into various categories in a small
way but is focused on the RO segment," says Mahesh Gupta, Chairman, Kent
RO Systems.
Water purification products from the likes of HUL and Kent are far more visible at
retail counters than Eureka Forbes but the company is undeterred. "We believe
that direct sales are our core and we would persist with the strategy," says Mr. S.
L. Goklaney.
Eureka Forbes appears to have fallen behind in one key emerging business
segment - gravity-based water filters that can work without electricity. In 2009,
Kent launched this product in India, seizing the first-mover advantage - Eureka
Forbes has yet to establish its foothold in the market. The market potential for
gravity-based water filters is huge given the crippling power shortage in most
parts of India, say industry executives. While about 92 per cent of urban areas
are electrified, rural electrification is just 55 per cent. "People use gravity-based
water purifiers in regions that have poor or no electricity supply," says Sasidhar
Chidanamarri, Associate Director, Environment & Building Technologies Practice
at Frost & Sullivan, a consulting firm.
In the vacuum cleaner market, Eureka Forbes' "Euro clean" range of products
have a market share of around 90 per cent. But there has been a dip in revenues
from vacuum cleaners recently along with a marginal decline in market share.
The segment accounted for about 16 per cent of the company's revenue in
2012/13.
CHAPTER4
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Tadlock (1978) analyzed the vocational education needs in Washington State
with a special reference for educating youth with handicapping conditions. One of
the high priorities among identified needs was that teachers need to increase
their knowledge of special education. The study also recommended that
vocational teaches need to be able to use specialized instruction techniques and
methods.
Bartos (1979) examined the need for and proficiency in 15 instructional
competencies as viewed by practicing teachers in Georgia, United States, Major
elements for which responses were solicited were planning instruction, managing
instruction, providing the learning environment, evaluation and being a
professional. Relevance of the findings to undergraduate and inservice training
programmes was noted in the study.
Vale et al. (1979) conducted a comparative study about inservice training needs
of teachers of the visually impaired and teachers of the hearing impaired in
California. A statistical analysis of the needs of both groups in instructional media
and materials is provided at both the cluster and area curriculum levels.
Demographic characteristics and needs of public and non-public/instructional
schoolteachers were also differentiated. The top three priorities of teachers of the
visually impaired for material development at the cluster level were in the social
development, language and perceptual/motor curriculum domains. The top three
priorities of teachers of the hearing impaired for material development at the
cluster curriculum level were in reading, social development and cognitive
development.
Mercykutty (1987) conducted a study to identify the difficulties experienced by
the teachers in teaching mathematics in the secondary schools of Kerala. A
normative survey method using questionnaire and interviews was adopted for
data collection from 125 secondary school mathematics teachers. The study
reported that majority of teachers felt difficulty in teaching Basic Mathematics.
The teachers also felt need for clarity in the content areas in Basic Mathematics.
Majority of teachers reported that they are in need of in-service training for
content areas, methods of mathematics teaching and use of audio-visuals.
Yanito, et al. (1987) prepared a paper. The term needs is a misnomer in
somerespects, as it is not really a matter of searching for or trying to determine
the need or wanting for the assessment. Rather it is a tool used to discover the
difference between what is (currently) and what ought to be (currently), in other
words the needs assessment is a determination of the "gap" betweenthe
situations occurring in the organization and what a preferred occurrence would
be (Clark, 1998).
Needs analysis is the systematic basis for decisions about how to influence
performance (Stout, 1995). In a broad sense needs assessment can be
described as a process for identifying the knowledge and skills necessary for
achieving organizational goals (Brinkerhoff & Gill, 1994). It has also been
described as a method of finding outthe nature and extent of performance
problems and how they can be solved (Molenda, Pershing, &Reigeluth, 1996). Therefore, needs assessment can be viewed as a study conducted to determine
the exact nature of an organizational problem and attempt to find solutions to
resolve those problems. The needs assessments becomes the foundation or
blueprint, if you will, for making recommendations about training and instruction,
supporting or adhering to organizational strategies, and for developing methods
to promote productivity within the organization. When organizations find they
have a problem often times they are quick to offer advice or superficial
statements that address only the symptoms of the problem. Because it is often
overlooked, needs assessment should be the first step in attempting to identify
the problem so that an appropriate and targeted solution or intervention can be
applied.
A needs analysis answers the questions who, what, when, and where but not
how, that is, the target audience (who needs to be trained), the task or content
(what needs to be taught) and the context or training environment (where and
when the training needs to be conducted) (Clark, 1998). Because we must first
answer these questions in order to accurately determine what and if a need
exists we will examine several of the significant needs-assessment models by
comparison and contrast to look at which model would serve the researchers
intended project. Additionally it should be noted that simply approaching a
problem takes time and consideration, therefore just as we would approach our
problem within the organization, so too must we find the right tool for the job.
The United Nation University/International Network on Water, Environment and Health(UNU/INWEH) (2001) in cooperation with the Islamic University of
Gaza strip and thePalestinian Higher Council for the Environment, worked on a
project for Gaza strip coastal and beach water quality monitoring as well as
assessment. During this project it was indicated that pollution of the seawater by
untreated wastewater outflows causes extensive illness among users of well-
liked coastal recreation beaches along the Gaza strip, with faecal coliform and
faecal streptococci levels healthy in excess of the U.S. Environment Protection
Agency (EPA) standards at many locations. The nastiest seawater contamination
was reported in middle of the Gaza strip, where sewage from Gaza city is
discharged. The study has suggested a wide-ranging monitoring program for the
water quality along Gaza strip coast with special concern on the Gaza city beach.
Ministry of Environmental Affairs (MEnA) (2001) reported that the Ministry of
Health in Gaza strip has established a monitoring program for seawater quality in
several localities along the beach of Gaza city. This program was conducted to
assess the microbiological pollution status. The samples were collected from
different selected locations along Gaza city beach from March to November
during 1998-2001. Results indicated significant microbiological pollution of the
coastal waters that exceeded the global established standards particularly in the
sites located close to sewage outfalls. Data also indicated that the contamination
caused by microbiological parameters have been reduced since 1999, as Gaza
wastewater treatment plant was re-established; other than the faecal coliform
level in 2001 have been increased again due to the lacking in the maintenance
process of Gaza wastewater treatment plant and the distraction of planned
projects during the crucial political situation in the Palestinian territory, which
occurred since September 2000 until now.
The Coastal Water Monitoring Programme (CWMP) as part of the
EnvironmentalInformation and Monitoring Programme (EIMP) under the
Egyptian Environmental Affairs Agency has been operative since March
1998,undertaking coastal monitoring on a bimonthly basis in the Mediterranean
coastal areas in Egypt (Halund et al. 1999). The marine water sampling
programme designed for the whole Egyptian coast, covering the Mediterranean
Sea, the Gulf of Sues, the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aqaba has compiled the data
obtained since March 1998. The programme was made to focus on the
measurements at 83 selected stations every second month. On the
Mediterranean coast, 45 stations were carefully selected taken into consideration
existing data and focusing on sources of pollution from industrial and urban
areas, major tourist resort areas and the outlets from the river Nile. The results of
the bacteriological examinations (E-coli, totalcoliformsand faecal streptococci)
showed a seasonal pattern with increased levels in July-August due to high
recreational use of the coastal area in this period. Several of the popular beaches
exceeded slightly the EU-standard for acceptable bathing water quality.
Papamichail et al. (2005) have been developed neural networks for predicting
the values of three water quality parameters for one month ahead of the Strymon
River at station located near the Greek-Bulgarian borders by utilising the existing
data of the monthly water quality as input variables. The monthly data of 13
collected parameters and the flow discharges at the selected stations during
1980-1990 were selected for the prediction purpose. The predictions result
showed satisfactory of ANN models for predicting water quality parameters. The
study provided a helpful predictive model for filling the gap ofmissing values in
database system of the Greek monitoring stations.
According to Zhou et al. (2006) to classify the detailed water quality index and
predict the water variables in the future, a Particle Swarm Optimisation (PSO)
based on ANN technology was proposed. The study over water quality can be
conducted in two events: categorisation and prediction. The former authors
focused on mapping between the water quality guide and the water quality class,
whereas some others emphasises predict of the existing water quality based on
the preceding water states parameters. The abovementioned authors have
developed ANN models and compared the achieved results fromANN with other
conventional methods; the developed model showed satisfactory. The results
also showed that PSO is a good training algorithm and could be used in other
actual world example for categorisation and prediction applications.
According to Maier and Dandy (1996b) in the recent years the applications of
ANN have extended to the field of environment and contamination problems as
well as the managing of water pollution and its control. These could be possible
because of the success of several scientists worked in this field previously. In
water quality control and management, the application of neural network has
provided a knowledgeable key to help in preparing cost-effective plans for
managing the water bodies.
Reddy (1991) presented article on feasible procedure to predict the water quality
variable. Water samples have been collected from problematic ground water and
surface water sources in different villages belonging to nine blocks/taluks of
Gulbarga district, Karnataka State. The water samples were analyzed for
physicochemical properties. Different types of statistical models like correlations
and regressions were applied to study the interrelationships between these
variables. Significant differences between blocks/taluks and different sources of
water obtained using analysis of variance two ways classification technique.
Analysis of six tube well water samples, which is the source of drinking water in
Roorkee city of Hardwar district was carried out along with physicochemical
and biotic analysis. Presence of bacterial community in relation to biotic factors is
sought by Garg Dinesh (1991).
Ravichandran et al (1991)studied the groundwater quality of Madras in the
context of polluted waterways of the city. Multiple regression analysis indicated
that the areas around waterways were contaminated with nitrates and
phosphates, while pH and electrical conductivity were beyond acceptable limits.
Ramaswami (1991) collected water samples from dug and tube wells near the
Noyil River in Tiruppur Municipal area for the assessment of chemical quality with
reference to Indian Standards for drinking water. It was observed that values of
several parameters exceeded the permissible limits pointing out to the necessity
of proper treatment, disposal and management of wastes discharged into the
river and on open land.
Physico chemical and bacterial parameters of some bore wells and dug wells of
Challapalli Mandal, Andhra Pradesh were monitored by Rao et al,. (1992).. The
quality of well water samples was assessed by comparing with existing standards
for important parameters and correlation coefficient among various water quality
parameters were determined .
Ground water samples during post monsoon and pre monsoon were analyzed in
upper GunjanaEru river basin of Cuddapah district, Andhra Pradesh to assess
the quality of water. The inequality was due to agricultural and domestic activities
through infiltration and percolation during monsoon as reported by Raju et al., (1992).
.K.Nithiyanandan (2000)in his project work entitled, “Market status of mineral
water industry with a special reference to TEAM”, reflects that consumption
patterns are changing in packaged mineral water industry. Mineral water is now
served on trains and aeroplanes. Besides the standard one-litre bottled water
which is still the largest seller, a variety of pack sizes have been introduced.
Mineral water is now available in 200ml pouch, and 500ml bottle, 1 litre and 2 litre
bottle, 5 litre jar and 20 litre cane. In railway departments, trains run for two days
may require about 50,000 litres of mineral water fora journey. In the modern day
living, stressful working condition and demanding life style make the body lose its
electrolytic balance. With companies positioning mineral water as ramification of
health, it has made the market potential limitless.
G.Durai (2001)made an attempt to study the future prospectus of mineral water
besides finding out the leading brand in Chennai city. In the case of fast moving
packages, it has been revealed that one-litre bottles are more in demand
accounting for 60 per cent of sales as against 10 per cent of sales of two litre
bottles. The fast moving and leading brand was identified as Bisleri due to its
taste and creditability of the company. He remarked that safe and reliable water
distribution can no longer be taken forgranted not even in the most developed
countries and the consumer is quite willing to pay more for quality taking into
consideration his own need, and his family health.
Senthilkumar (2002)in his study focused to find out the sources of awareness of
consumers towards mineral water and the individual consumption of mineral
water. He found that advertisement is the best source of information as all the
respondents are aware of mineral water. Majority of the respondents spend up to
Rs.500 per month towards mineral water, consume mineral water for the one to
two years having monthly consumption of up to 10 litres. The packaged drinking
water consumer is attracted by thebenefits of easy accessibility, purity and
hygiene and only a small segment of consumers have evolved to the level of
being loyalists of good brand. The packaged drinking water is now served on
trains, airlines and in parties. Besides, the companies have introduced bigger
pack sizes to cater to a variety of needs. Packaged drinking water is available in
1 litre, 2 litre and 500ml bottles, 20 litre cane and 200 ml packets. Bottled drinking
water market in the country is poised for a quantum leap notwithstanding the
stricter quality standards to be imposed by the Bureau of Indian Standards of
manufacturing units.
H B Mathur, Sapna Johnson Rashmi Mishra, Avinash Kumar, andBhupinder Singh (2003)in their study titled “CSE Report on pesticide residues in bottled
water”, analyzed pesticide residues in bottled water. Pure drinking water is a
luxury in India today. Most water sources are contaminated; waterborne diseases
such as diarrhea, dysentery, typhoid, jaundice and gastroenteritis are legion.
Even the municipal water supply is not free of contaminants like pesticides, and
heavy metals. People either 8 Peter Jaer Jensen, JeroenEnsink, Gayathri
Jayasinghe, Tropical Mediane and international journal, Vol.7, issue 7, pp. 604-
609, July 20029 Prof H B MathurDrSapna Johnson Dr Rashmi Mishra,MrAvinash
Kumar MrBhupinder Singh CSEboil water for drinking purpose or install purifiers.
Of late, they have also turned to bottled water, available in the open market; this
water is perceived as safe. Given the human dependence on water, they cannot
afford to be careless about the kind and quality of water they drink. Various top
brands like Bisleri, Kinley, etc. claims about purity of their mineral water and
advertise their water, as the safest. But the source of water for different bottlers is
bore-well (groundwater).
Sunal (2003)in his study “A Study of Market Potential for Packaged Drinking
Water in Hospital with reference to Aquafina”, focused on the market potential
forpackaged drinking water consumption in hospital and he concluded in his
study that the untapped outlets (canteens) would also enable the company to
track out the variability in the performance of the company and he also
determined whether the soft drinks giants require to enter in new segments of
packaged drinking water (bulk and sachets). The main issue that Pepsi was
facing was that the conventional marks were getting exhausted in the midst of the
cool was and new unconventional channels need to be ventured in to for the
serve.
ADA Division of Communications (2003)in cooperation with the Journal ofthe
American Dental Association report conveyed that the human body is made up
mostly of water and depends on water to keep organs and systems functioning
properly. Water regulates body temperature; helps remove waste, cushions the
joints and transports Sunal.C. K, “A Study of Market Potential for Packaged
Drinking Water in Hospital with reference to nutrients and oxygen to billions of
cells. Increasing water intake, sometimes can help alleviate a condition called dry
mouth, or xerostomia. And water that contains an adequate amount of fluoride
helps prevent tooth decay and builds strong teeth. Health experts generally
recommend consuming eight to 10 cups of water a day. The amount may vary
based on body size, physical activity and exposure to hot weather. More health-
conscious consumers are sipping bottled water. Some even forgo fluoridated tap
water in their homes for costly bottled water. A recent study shows that
Americans consumed more than five billion gallons of bottled water in 2000, more
than double the amount from a decade earlier. Some predict that bottled water
soon may become the nation‟sIn areas where natural fluoride occurs in water
below the optimal level, many communities add a minute amount of fluoride to
the water supply to make certain that residents receive the benefits of fluoride.
While the fluoride content of bottled water varies greatly, the vast majority of
bottled waters do not contain optimal levels of fluoride. Some contain no fluoride.
When water is treated before it is bottled, fluoride may be lost. For example,
many popular brands of bottled water undergo reverse osmosis or distillation.
These treatments remove all of the fluoride from the water.
Daarowska, A. Borcz& J. Nawrocki (2003)in their article indicated thatwith
increased consumption of bottled water, it is necessary to pay more attention to
its quality. However, the quality control system in bottled water plants tends to be
focused on the microbiological safety of water. Polyethylene terephtalate) (PET)
containers are today commonly used for bottling mineral water, although PET
bottles can be responsible forthe formation of undesirable carbonyl compounds
that can migrate into its contents. Before manufacturing a bottle, the plastic has
to pass through a series of processing stages. During this treatment, thermal
degradation and hydrolysis can occur with the PET material.
The high temperature used in the final stage of the bottle performs production
from thePET material cause’s thermal degradation of polymer and contributes to
the formation of the high concentration of acetaldehyde in the polymer structure.
The technology of PET bottle production causes thermal degradation of the
polymer and this process can lead toaldehyde formation. Acetaldehyde is held in
the polymer structure of bottle material and during the storage period passes
from the wall into the water and into the air. The higher the level of acetaldehyde
in the bottle material, the higher is the level of acetaldehyde in bottled water.
There is no correlation between pH and aldehyde concentration in bottled water.
Cesare Dosi& K. William Easter (2003)in their article focused on developing the
conditions for privatization of water service or for establishing water markets. It is
important to guard against potential market failures. In water markets it is
important to develop a non-legalistic means for making sure that water trades do
not have significant third-party effects. For privatization, regulation is needed to
prevent entities from taking advantage of their monopoly control over either the
water supply or the distribution network. Clearly second-best issues arise if
significant third-party impacts occur because of water trades or monopoly control
over the distribution system. The only economically feasible competitive
distribution networks are bottled water distribution systems, which are a minor
(typically, a complementary) component of the whole water distribution system.
U.Gopala Krishnan (2004)in his dissertation entitled “A Study on Consumers
Preferences towards various Brands of Mineral Water in Madurai City”, analyzed
the buying pattern of mineral water in Madurai city. The study revealed that 40
per cent of the respondents were in the age group of 21-30 years, 38 per cent
belonged to graduationlevel and 26 per cent of the respondents were at post-
graduation level. The study further unfolded that 36 per cent of the respondents
were government servants, 24 per cent were students and 16 per cent were
working in private concerns. Majority of the respondentspurchasedBisleri and
they had to change the brand only due its non-availability.
CHAPTER5
RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY
PROBLEM STATEMENTKnowing need of customers is the key to success for any company. Eureka
Forbes is also one of them who successfully understood the need of customers
over a period of time. One of their product water purifier is found almost every
household in any city. With the passage of time, they were in search of new
markets. They realized industrial sector has huge such potential for water purifier.
This study aims to understand the need of water purifier of manufacturing unit or
companies from industrial sector. It explores the need, usage, and requirements
of such products in water purifiers. Hence, the research is undertaken as “To study need assessment of industrial water purifier".OBJECTIVES OF STUDY
Primary objective1. To study need assessment of industrial water purifier.
Secondary objectives1. To understand the requirement of mineral water among industrial users.
2. To know expectations of companies for water purifier as a product of Eureka
Forbes.
3. To study factors influencing choices of water purifier among companies.
4. To know future purchase intention towards drinking water purifier of brand
Aquaguard.
5. To evaluate industrial user’s attitude towards Aquaguard as the brand of
water purifier.
6. To analyze their preference towards water purifier among companies.
RESEARCH DESIGN“Research design is the plan structure and strategy if investigation conceived so
as to obtain answers to research question and to control variance”
Descriptive research designDescriptive research is also known as statistical research. It describes data and
characteristics about the population or phenomenon being studied. Descriptive
research answers the questions who, what, where, when and how. This study is
complex and determines high degree scientific skill to study the problem.
In this study the descriptive research design has been conducted.
SAMPLING PLAN Population: All small, medium, and large size companies in Surat city can
be considered as part of population for the study.
Sample Size: Sample size for this study 100 industries from different
sector.
Sampling Method: In this study non probability, convenience sampling
method used to drag sample out of population.
SOURCES OF DATABasically there are two types of data collection sources:
1. Primary DataPrimary data means data collected directly from first-hand experience. Means
data collected for the first time by any researcher for any research use.
This study collectprimary data by surveying different companies.
2. Secondary Data Secondary data are those, which have already been collected by some other
person for their purpose and publish. Secondary data are usually in the shape of
finished products.
In this study, the secondary data collected from various sources such as
research paper, internet, and websites etc. for the preparation of literature review,
industry and company profile.
DATA COLLECTION METHOD
This research study uses Survey method for collecting primary data from the
respondents.
DATA COLLECTION TOOLFor this project structured 100questionnaire used as tool for data collection from
the respondent for the purpose of conducting research.
TOOLS FOR ANALYSISFor the purpose of analysis various analytical approaches use simple
percentage, frequency, and hypothesis charts by using SPSS software.
LIMITATION OF THE STUDYSample sizeThe limitation is sample size, taken by us is 100 only, due to which we may not
get the proper result.
AreaThe area was limitation to sample size only, so we cannot the degree of the
literacy outside the city.
CHAPTER6
DATA ANALYSIS&
INTERPRETATIONS
1. Select an appropriate option which describe your usage of water purifier:[ ] Filtered water for drinking purpose
[ ] Filtered water for the manufacturing purpose
[ ] Both of the above
[ ] None of the above
Table:6.1 Usage of Water Purifier
Particulars Respondents
Filtered water for drinking purpose 62
Filtered water for the manufacturing purpose 7
Both of the above 30
None of the above 1
Figure:6.1 Usage of Water Purifier (%)
Filtered water for drinking purpose
Filtered water for the manufacturing purpose
Both of the above
None of the above
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
62
7
30
1
InterpretationFrom the above graph it can be stated that most of the clients are using filtered
water for drinking purpose i.e. 62% and 7% of the clients are using filtered water
for manufacturing purpose, while 30% of them are using for both manufacturing
and drinking purpose.
2.This Manufacturing unit is……? (Tick one) [ ] Pharmaceutical [ ] Chemical & Fertilizer
[ ] Food Processing Unit [ ] Paper Manufacturing
[ ] Other____________
Table:6.2 Types of Manufacturing Unit
Particular Respondents
Pharmaceutical 2
Food Processing Unit 4
Chemical & Fertilizer 19
Paper Manufacturing 1
Other(printing &dying) 74
Figure: 6.2 Types of Manufacturing Unit (%)
Pharmaceutical
Food Processing unit
Chemical & Fertilizer
Paper Manufacturing
Other
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
2
4
19
1
74
InterpretationFrom the above graph it can be stated that most of the units i.e. 74% under the
study are from industries like printing and dying, textile and other. 19% units are
from chemical and fertilizer, 4% are from food processing industry and 2% are
from pharmaceutical industry.
3. How many Employees working in your organization?[ ] Less than 250 employees [ ] 251-500 employees
[ ] 501-750 employees [ ] 751-1000 employees
[ ] More than 1000 employees
Table:6.3 Employee’s working in Organization
Particular Respondents
Less than 250 employees 69
251-500 employees 22
501-750 employees 3
751-1000 employees 6
More than 1000 employees 0
Figure:6.3 Employee’s Working in Organization (%)
InterpretationFrom the above graph it can be seen that 69% units have less than 250
employees, 22% units have more than 250 employees but less than 500 and 6%
units have more than 750 employees but less than 1000 employees.
4. State your quantity that describes your usage of water for drinking per day (in Cubic meter)?[ ] Less than 1 cubic meter [ ] 1- 2 cubic meter
[ ] 2-5 cubic meter [ ] More than 5 cubic meter
Table:6.4 Usage of Water for Drinking Per Day
Particular Respondents
Less than 1 cubic meter 58
1- 2 cubic meter 10
2-5 cubic meter 5
More than 5 cubic meter 27
Less than 250 employees
251-500 emploees
501-750 employees
751-1000 employees
More than 1000 employees
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
69
22
3
6
0
Figure:6.4 Usage of Water for Drinking Per Day
Less than 1 cubic meter
1-2 cubic meter
2-5 cubic meter
more than 5 cubic meter
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
58
10
5
27
InterpretationFrom the above graph it can be revealed that 58% units are using less than 1
cubic meter water per day, 27% of units are using more than 5 cubic water per
day, 10% of units are using 1 to 2 cubic water per day and 5% of units are using
2 to 5 cubic water per day.
5. Are you using any water purifier for drinking?[ ] Yes [ ] No
Table:6.5 Using any Water Purifier for Drinking
Particular Respondents
Yes 69
No 31
Figure:6.5 Using any Water Purifier for Drinking (%)
69%
31%
Yes No
InterpretationFrom the above graph it can be seen that 69% of units are using water purifier in
their company and 31% of units are not using water purifier in their company.
6. If YES what is the capacity of the purifiera. RO Purifier ________________
b. UV Purifier ________________
Table:6.6 Capacity of the Purifier
Particular Respondents
RO Purifier 46
UV Purifier 54
Figure:6.6 Capacity of the Purifier (%)
46%
54%
RO Purifier UV Purifier
InterpretationFrom the above graph it can be stated that 54% units are using UV purifier, while
46% of units are using RO purifier.
7. Which of the factor will work when you select a Water Purifier?
[ ] Removal of TDS and hardness
[ ] Removal of bacterial Contamination
[ ] Saving of Electricity
[ ] Removal of Physical impurities
Table:6.7 Factors Affected in Selection of Water Purifier
Particular Respondents
Removal of TDS and hardness 69
Removal of bacterial Contamination 69
Saving of Electricity 68
Removal of Physical impurities 53
Figure:6.7 Factors Affected in Selection of Water Purifier(%)
Remov
al of
TDS and h
ardne
ss
Remov
al of
bacte
rial C
ontam
inatio
n
Saving
of E
lectric
ity
Remov
al of
Physic
al im
puriti
es0
10203040506070
69 69 68 53
Respondent (%)
InterpretationFrom the above graph it can be stated that 69% units are selecting water purifier for removal of TDS and hardness and also removal of bacterial contamination, 68% units are selecting water purifier to saving of electricity and 53% are selecting for removal of physical impurities.
8. State the level of importance on above ticked factors on following scale:
(1 – Unimportant, 7 – Very Important)
Table: 6.8 Level of Importance
Particulars 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Removal of bacterial Contamination 0 0 1 2 10 3 53
Removal of TDS and hardness 0 0 0 1 1 14 53
Saving of Electricity 0 0 3 9 14 9 53
Removal of Physical impurities 0 1 3 3 5 9 53
Figure: 6.8 Level of Importance in (%)
Remov
al of
bacte
rial c
ontam
inatio
n
For rem
oval
of TD
S and H
ardne
ss
Saving
of E
lectric
ity
Remov
al of
Physic
al im
puriti
es0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 0 0 00 0 0 11 03 32 1
93
10
1
14
53
149 9
53 53
33 35
Very Unimportant UnimportantSomewhat Unimportant Neither important or nor Unimportant Somewhat Important ImportantVery Important
InterpretationFrom the above graph it can be concluded that 10 units considered somewhat important to removal of bacterial contamination, 53 units considered very important to removal of bacterial contamination, 14 units believed that it is important for removal of TDS and hardness, 9 units are neither important or nor unimportant to saving of electricity.
9. Are you using water purifier of Eureka Forbes?
[ ] Yes [ ] No
Table:6.9 Using Water Purifier of Eureka Forbes
Particular Respondents
Yes 14
No 54
Figure: 6.9 Using Water Purifier of Eureka Forbes (%)
21%
79%
YesNo
InterpretationFrom the above graph it can be inferred that 21% units are using Eureka
Forbes’s water purifier, while 79% units are using other brands water purifier.
9.1 If No, which of following brand of water purifier are you using?[ ] Kent [ ] Livepure
[ ] Ion Exchange [ ] Others Specify……
Table:6.10 Which Water Purifier Are You Using
Particular Respondents
Kent 1
Livepure 2
Ion Exchange 0
Other(Bottle water) 51
Figure:6.10 Water Purifier Are You Using (%)
Kent Livepure Ion Exchange Other1 2
0
51
InterpretationFrom the above graph it can be concluded that 51% units are using bottle water
purifier, 2% units using livepure water purifier and 1% units are using kent water
purifier.
9.2 What are the reasons for selecting of above ticked brand?
[ ] Advanced technology [ ] Best Filtration Process
[ ] Better Taste of water [ ] Warranty and safety
[ ] Excellent Technical Support [ ] Competitive Pricess
[ ] Less Maintenance [ ] If other, please specify: ___
Table:6.11 Reason for Ticked above Brand
Particular Respondents
Advanced technology 6
Best Filtration Process 45
Better Taste of water 55
Warranty and safety 22
Excellent Technical Support 5
Competitive Prices 47
Less Maintenance 51
Other 0
Figure:6.11 Reason for Ticked above Brand (%)
Advan
ced t
echn
ology
Best F
iltrati
on P
roces
s
Better
Taste
of wate
r
Warran
ty an
d safe
ty
Excell
ent T
echn
ical S
uppo
rt
Compe
titive
Pric
es
Less
Main
tenan
ceOthe
r0
20
40
60
6
4555
225
47 51
0
Respondent
InterpretationFrom the above graph it can be concluded that 55% units are using water purifier
because of better taste of water, 51% units are using water purifier because of
less maintanance, 47% units are using water purifier because of lower prices,
45% units are using water purifier because of best filtration process, 22% units
are using water purifier because of warranty and safety and 6% are using
because of advance technology.
10. Have you ever used Water Purifier of Eureka Forbes in past?
[ ] Yes [ ] No
Table:6.12 Ever Used Water Purifier of Eureka Forbes
Particular Respondents
Yes 0
No 55
Figure:6.12 Ever Used Water Purifier of Eureka Forbes (%)
100%
YesNo
InterpretationFrom the above graph it can be concluded that none of the units have used
Eureka Forbes water purifier in past.
11. In Future, will you buy Eureka Forbes as a brand of water purifier?
Table:6.13 In Future, will you buy Water Purifier of Eureka Forbes
Particulars
respondents
Yes 0
No 39
Can’t say 23
Figure:6.13 In Future, will you buy Water Purifier of Eureka Forbes
Yes No Can’t say0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0
39
23
InterpretationFrom the above graph it can be concluded that bay in futuer 0 and 39 is not bay
and 23 is can not say bay water purifier of Eureka Forbes.
11.1 If Yes, State your level of expectations on following particulars and scale: (1 - Strongly Disagree, 5 - Strongly Agree)
Particulars 1 2 3 4 5
Look for Morden Technology
Products as per Need
Value for Money
Filtration Quality of Water
Excellent Service
InterpretationNone of therespondents.
12. Please circle the number which indicates number of years you are using water purifier of Eureka Forbes?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15+
Table: 6.14 Number of years are Using Water Purifierof Eureka Forbes
Particular Respondents
1 Year 0
2 Year 0
3 Year 6
4 Year 4
5 Year 3
6 Year 1
7 Years+ 0
Figure: 6.14 Number of years are Using Water Purifier of Eureka Forbes
1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Years+0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 0
6
4
3
1
0
InterpretationFollowing table interpreat that number of units and number of years are using
water purifier of Eureka Forbes are 4 units are using from last 4 years, 3 units
are using from last 5 years & 1units are using from last 6 years.
13. Rate the usage experience of water purifier as a brand of Eureka Forbes on the following criteria and scale:
Table: 6.15 Usage Experience of Water Purifier for Eureka Forbes(1 -Strongly Disagree, 5 - Strongly Agree)
Particulars 1 2 3 4 5
High Product Durability 0 0 9 4 1
Good Water Quality 0 0 0 12 2
Valuable Deal 0 0 1 9 4
Excellent after Sales Services 0 0 0 9 5
Figure: 6.15 Usage Experience of Water Purifier for Eureka Forbes
High product durabil-ity
Good water quality valuable deal Excellent after sales services
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0 0 0 00 0 0 0
9
01
0
4
12
9 9
1
2
4
5
Srongly Disagree Disagree NutralAgree Strongly Agree
InterpretationFrom the above graph it can be stated that 9 units are neutral with the high product durability, 12 units are agreed with the good water quality, 9 units are agreed with valuable deal and 9 units are agreed with excellent after sales services.14. Rate your overall satisfaction with Eureka Forbes on following scale:
(1- Highly Dissatisfactory, 7- Highly Satisfactory) 1 7
Table:6.16 Satisfaction with the Eureka Forbes
Particular Respondents
Highly Dissatisfactory 0
Dissatisfactory 0
Somewhat Dissatisfaction 0
Neither satisfaction or nor Dissatisfaction 0
Somewhat satisfactory 1
Satisfactory 13
Highly Satisfactory 0
Figure: 6.16 Satisfaction with the Eureka Forbes (%)
Highly Dissatisfactory
Dissatisfactory
Somewhat Dissatisfaction
Neither satisfaction or nor Dissatisfaction
Somewhat satisfactory
Satisfactory
Highly Satisfactory
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
0
0
0
0
1
13
0
Interpretation
From the above table it can be interpreted that 13 units those are using Eureka
Forbs they have rated level of satisfactory for the using Eureka Forbs and 1 unit
have rated somewhat satisfactory.
15. If, No State the reasons for not using Water Purifier?[ ] Already satisfied with quality of Water supplied by Municipality
[ ] We have our own plant of Water Purifier
[ ] if other, please specify: __________________
Table:6.17 State the Reason for not Using Water Purifier
Particular Respondents
Already satisfied with quality of Water supplied by Municipality
20
We have our own plant of Water Purifier 1
Other 10
Figure:6.17State the Reason for not using Water Purifier(%)
Already satisfied with quality of water supplied by municipality
we have our own plant of water purifier
Other
0 5 10 15 20 25
20
1
10
Interpretation
From the above graph it can be inferred that 20% units are not using water
purifier because they are satisfied with quality of water suppiled by municipality,
10% units are not using water purifier due to other reason and 1% unit is not
using water purifier because they have their own plant for water purifier.
16. Which of the brand you would like to go for water purifier in future?
[ ] Kent [ ] Livepure
[ ] Pure it [ ]Ion Exchange.
[ ] Other Specify_____
Table: 6.18 Like to go for Water Purifier in Future
Particular Respondents
Kent 0
Livepure 0
Pure it 0
Ion Exchange 0
Other 31
Figure:6.18Like to go for Water Purifier in Future (%)
Kent
Livepure
Pure it
Ion Exchange
Other
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
0
0
0
0
31
InterpretationFrom the above graph it can be seen that 31% units would like to use other
brand such as water botteled or they want to continue with their own plant for
water purifier and no one would like to use brand like pure it, kent, livepure and
Ion exchange.
HYPOTHESIS TESTING
CHI SQUARE TEST OF INDEPENDENCE
H0: There is no significance dependency between types of manufacturing units
and required capacity of water purifier
H1: There is significance dependency between types of manufacturing units and
required capacity of water purifier
Table No.6.19: Cross Tabulation of Variable
This Manufacturing unit is * capacity of the purifier Cross tabulation
Count
capacity of the purifier
Total
RO Purifier
UV Purifier
This Manufacturing unit is
Pharmaceutical 7 5 12
Chemical & Fertilizer
6 5 11
Food Processing Unit
11 22 33
Paper Manufacturing
8 5 13
Total 32 37 69
Table No.6.20: Chi-Square Tests
Value Df Asymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 4.444a 3 .217
Likelihood Ratio 4.500 3 .212
Linear-by-Linear
Association
.197 1 .657
N of Valid Cases 69
Interpretation: the significance value of chi-square calculated is more than 0.05,
so the null hypothesis will be fail to accept.So, there is significance dependency
between types of manufacturing units and required capacity of water purifier.
ANOVA ANALYSIS
H0: There is no significance variation by types of manufacturing units and level of
importance for factors for selection of water purifier.
H1: There is significance variation by types of manufacturing units and level of
importance for factors for selection of water purifier.
Table No.6.21: ANOVA
Df F Sig.Removal of bacterial Contamination 4 3.221 .016
9599
For Removal of TDS and hardness 4 3.426 .0129599
Saving of Electricity 4 4.431 .0039599
Removal of Physical impurities 4 4.728 .0029599
Table No.6.22: Test of Homogeneity of Variances
Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
Removal of bacterial Contamination
26.461a 3 95 .000
For Removal of TDS and hardness
33.242b 3 95 .000
Saving of Electricity 4.960c 3 95 .003
Removal of Physical impurities
3.416d 3 95 .021
InterpretationAbove table shows that f values are 26.46, 33.242, 4.960, and3.416.So, there is
no significance of variation by types of manufacturing units or factors importance
given for selection of water purifier because overall significance value is more
than 0.05.
ANOVA ANALYSISH0: There is no significance variation on satisfaction level of Eureka Forbes water
purifier by numbers of years for using Eureka Forbes water purifier
H1: There is significance variation on satisfaction level of Eureka Forbes water
purifier by numbers of years for using Eureka Forbes water purifier
Table No.6.23: Number of years you are Using Water Purifier of EurekaForbes
Table no.6.24 Test of Homogeneity of Variances
number of years you are using water purifier of Eureka Forbes
Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
150.469a 1 97 .000
a. Groups with only one case are ignored in computing the test of
homogeneity of variance for number of years you are using water purifier of
Eureka Forbes.
InterpretationAbove table shows that there is f value is 150.469 so there no significance
variation on satisfaction level of Eureka Forbes water purifier by numbers of
years for using Eureka Forbes water purifier because overall significance value is
more than 0.05.
Df F Sig.
Between Groups 2 754.781 .000
Within Groups 97
Total 99
CHAPTER7
FINDINGS
From the analysis it was found that most of the clients are using filtered water
for drinking purpose while some clients are using filtered water for
manufacturing purpose and some of the clients are using both manufacturing
and drinking purpose.
For this study various kinds of units are taken into consideration i.e.
Pharmaceuticals units, Chemicals & Fertilizers units, Food processing units,
dying and printing etc.
This study finds that organization like pharmaceutical having less than 250
employees, while some units have more than 250 employees but less than
500 employees like food industry and some units have more than 750
employees but less than 1000 employees like dying and printing industry.
From the study it can be revealed that 58% units are using less than 1 cubic
meter water per day, 27% of units are using more than 5 cubic water per day,
10% of units are using 1 to 2 cubic water per day and 5% of units are using 2
to 5 cubic water per day.
Itwas found out that 46% units are using RO purifier and 54% units are using
UV purifier.
From the analysis it was found that 69 units are using water purifier for
removal of TDS and Hardness, 69 units are using water purifier forremoval of
bacterial contamination, and while remaining of the units are using water
purifier based on saving electricity and removal of physical impurities.
From the study it reveals that removal of TDS & Hardness, and Removal of
bacterial Contaminations were important factors in selecting water purifier.
Total no of units surveyed in which 54% units are those who are not using
Eureka Forbes Purifier.
From the analysis it was found that the brand of water purifier using is others
local brands of water purifier like water bottle, while very less are using live
pure water purifier and only one can use Kent water purifier.
From the analysis it was found that 6 in advanced technology, 45 in Best
Filtration Process, 55 in Better Taste of water, 22 in Warranty and safety, 5 in
Excellent Technical Support, 47 in Competitive Prices, 51 in Less
Maintenance have ticked respectively for selection factors for purifier into
their units.
From the analysis it can be stated that those who have the other brand of
water purifier, like their own plant or other’s but none of them have ever used
Eureka Forbes water purifier in past.
From the study it was found that those units who were using purifier having
usage experience of 4 years and less.
This analysis revels that the usage experience of water purifier is neutral with
the high product durability, some units have agreed with the good water
quality and valuable deal, while some units agreedwith excellent after sale
services.
From the study that it can be analyzed that most of the clients of Eureka
Forbes were satisfied with Eureka Forbes products.
It was found that the reason for not using water purifier was they have already
satisfied with quality of Water supplied by Municipality, they have their own
plant of Water Purifier or water provided by local company.
Study finds that switch over of units for purifier is more preferred bottle water
brands of purification company is more than any other brand.
It was statistically proven by using Chi- squares test that there is significance
dependency between types of manufacturing units and level of importance for
factors for selection of water purifier.
It was statistically proven by using ANOVA test that there is no significance
variation by types of manufacturing units and level of importance for factors for
selection of water purifier.
It was statistically proven by using ANOVA test that there is no significance
variation on satisfaction level of Eureka Forbes water purifier by numbers of
years for using Eureka Forbes water purifier.
CHAPTER 8
CONCLUSIONS
In this research first the analysis of the home appliance in water purify industry at
global, analyzes this market depending on its market segments, major
geographies, and current market trends. Geographies analyzed under this
research report include North America, Asia Pacific, Europe, Rest of the World.
The market for water purification was USD 85 billion in 2010 (only equipment and
products) and is growing on an average over 6–10 percent per year depending
on the country.
Need assessment is an important element that every organization follow so as to
develop an accurate plan for the success of an organization. The water
purification business in India is undergoing major changes, not just in terms of
technology but also in terms of pricing and competition. In it Eureka Forbes in
India is a leading water purifier company and also provide the facility of water
purification system, vacuum cleaner and air purifiers. The threat of harmful
contaminants in drinking water can no longer be reasonably ignored.
Study concludes that most of the manufacturing units are still depends upon the
Surat Municipality purification and also those units are already using the water
purifier they consideration local water purifier for their daily need of purifier water.
Major units are dependence upon factors like cleanliness of water, hardness of
water, germs free water, etc. and they basically use their water purifier for purify
their drinking water only.
Those clients who were using Eureka Forbes, are satisfied with the performance
of Eureka Forbes. Also they consider for selection of Eureka Forbes on this basis
this factors like best test of water and best filtration process. So, ultimately study
conclude that need of water purifier is based upon test and quality of drinking
water.
Most of client are using bottle water purifier, some client using different brand of
water purifier like Kent water purifier, Livepure etc. Those are using Eureka
Forbes preferenceof neutral with the high product durability, agreed with the
good water quality, agreed with valuable deal and agreed with excellent after
sales services.Some client use other brand such as water botteled or they want
to continue with their own plant for water purifier.
Conclusion of this study is based upon the objectives are decided to check need
assessment for water purifier for industrial units for that Surat city is selected.The
threat of harmful contaminants in drinking water can no longer be reasonably
ignored. The correlation between contaminated drinking water and many
significant diseases and health problems is far too strong to discount. Study
finds that most of the manufacturing units are still depends upon the Surat
Municipality purification and also those units are already using the water purifier
they consideration local water purifier for their daily need of purifier water. The
units are dependence upon factors like cleanliness of water, hardness of water,
germs free water, etc. and they basically use their water purifier for purify their
drinking water only.
For selection of Eureka Forbes for those units into study are satisfied for the
performance of Eureka Forbes for purification their water. Also they consider for
selection of Eureka Forbes on this basis this factors like best test of water and
best filtration process. So, ultimately study conclude that need of water purifier is
based upon test and quality of drinking water for who are using Eureka Forbes
Purifier.
CHAPTER 9
RECOMMENDATIONS
The company should take the step for reducing price of water purifiers.
It is suggested to company that it should take improvement in the areas of
material quality, and maintenance of water purifiers.
The company has to provide some scheme and discount for purchasing
water purifier.
If company should provide facilities of free service come time to time for
technicion.it also help to increase in Seles of every product.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
REFERENCES
Aposhian, H. Vasken, Charles H. Tadlock, and Thomas E. Moon. "Protection of mice against the lethal effects of sodium arsenite—a quantitative comparison of a number of chelating agents." Toxicology and applied pharmacology 61.3 (1981): 385-392.
Bagdade, JohnD, et al. "Polyamines: an unrecognised cardiovascular risk factor in chronic dialysis?." The Lancet 313.8113 (1979): 412-413.
Hargrove, J. W., and G. A. Vale. "Aspects of the feasibility of employing odour-baited traps for controlling tsetse flies (Diptera: Glossinidae)." Bulletin of Entomological Research 69.02 (1979): 283-290.
Kapoor, Pramesh N., et al. "η 3-allyl) dicarbonylmolybdenum (II) complexes of the unsymmetrical ditertiary phosphines Ph 2 PCH 2 CH 2 P (C 6 H 4 X) 2 (X= m-F, p-F or m-CF 3)." Journal of organometallic chemistry 322.1 (1987): 71-75.
Yanito, Trenly. "Teacher Attitudes toward Mainstreaming: A Literature Review." (1987).
Jeong, Sangho, Amy E. Trotochaud, and Steven E. Clark. "The Arabidopsis CLAVATA2 gene encodes a receptor-like protein required for the stability of the CLAVATA1 receptor-like kinase." The Plant Cell 11.10 (1999): 1925-1933.
Brown, Pamela J., Patricia R. Recupero, and Robert Stout. "PTSD substance abuse comorbidity and treatment utilization." Addictive behaviors 20.2 (1995): 251-254.
Brinkerhoff, Robert O., and Stephen J. Gill. The Learning Alliance: Systems Thinking in Human Resource Development. The Jossey-Bass Management Series. Jossey-Bass, Inc., 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104, 1994.
Molenda, Michael, James A. Pershing, and Charles M. Reigeluth. "Designing instructional systems." The ASTD training and development handbook 4 (1996): 266-293.
Adeel, Zafar. "Focus on new water issues—perspectives at the end of the International Year of Freshwater." Global Environmental Change 14 (2004): 1-4.
El-Fadl, Karma, and Mutasem El-Fadel. "Comparative assessment of EIA systems in MENA countries: challenges and prospects." Environmental Impact Assessment Review 24.6 (2004): 553-593.
Katritsis, Demosthenes G., et al. "Transcoronary transplantation of autologous mesenchymal stem cells and endothelial progenitors into infarcted human myocardium." Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 65.3 (2005): 321-329.
Zhou, Qi-Cun, et al. "Optimal dietary methionine requirement for juvenile cobia (Rachycentroncanadum)." Aquaculture 258.1 (2006): 551-557.
Gevrey, Muriel, IoannisDimopoulos, and SovanLek. "Review and comparison of methods to study the contribution of variables in artificial neural network models." Ecological Modelling 160.3 (2003): 249-264.
Barman, Hirak Kumar, et al. "Genetic variation between four species of Indian major carps as revealed by random amplified polymorphic DNA assay." Aquaculture 217.1 (2003): 115-123.
Garg, S. P., et al. "Endogenous cortisol profile in patients with central serous chorioretinopathy." British journal of ophthalmology 81.11 (1997): 962-964.
Prasad, Y. V. R. K., and N. Ravichandran. "Effect of stacking fault energy on the dynamic recrystallization during hot working of FCC metals: A study using processing maps." Bulletin of Materials Science 14.5 (1991): 1241-1248.
Kannel, William B., et al. "Regional obesity and risk of cardiovascular disease; the Framingham Study." Journal of clinical epidemiology 44.2 (1991): 183-190.
VIJAYALAKSHMI, N. "MARKETING OF PACKAGED DRINKING WATER IN COIMBATORE CITY." (2015).
Durai, G., M. Rajasimman, and N. Rajamohan. "Aerobic digestion of tannery wastewater in a sequential batch reactor by salt-tolerant bacterial strains." Applied Water Science 1.1-2 (2011): 35-40.
Venugopal, Senthil Kumar, et al. "Demonstration that C-reactive protein decreases eNOS expression and bioactivity in human aortic endothelial cells." Circulation 106.12 (2002): 1439-1441.
Mathur, H. B., et al. "Analysis of pesticide residues in bottled water (Delhi Region)." Center for Science and Environment (2003).
Sunal, Dennis W., et al. "Research-supported best practices for developing online learning." Journal of Online Interactive Learning 2.1 (2003).
Poon, Ada SY, David NC TSe, and Robert W. Brodersen. "An adaptive multiantenna transceiver for slowly flat fading channels." Communications, IEEE Transactions on 51.11 (2003): 1820-1827.
Dosi, Cesare, and K. William Easter. "Market Failure and Role of Markets and Privatization in AlleviatingWater Scarcity." International Journal of Public Administration 26.3 (2003): 265-290.
Devika, J. "'A people united in development': developmentalism in modern Malayalee identity." (2007).
WEBSITES
www.eurekaforbes.com
http://googleweblight.com/?lite_url=http://forbeslux.com/
eureka_forbes_ltd.php&ei=SD4Imhu7&lc=en-
IN&geid=7&s=1&m=301&ts=1444291938&sig=APONPFn15nRyXns8UZ3
g6Mu-V3wiGvfnVg
www.transparencymarketresearch.com
www.technavio.com/report/water-purifier-market-in-india-2014-2018
www.slideshare.net/gnanasundaram/water-purifiers-market-in-indi
QUESTIONNAIRE3. Select an appropriate option which describe your usage of water purifier:
[ ] Filtered water for drinking purpose
[ ] Filtered water for the manufacturing purpose
[ ] Both of the above
[ ] None of the above.
2.This Manufacturing unit is……? (Tick one) [ ] Pharmaceutical [ ] Chemical & Fertilizer[ ] Food Processing Unit [ ] Paper Manufacturing [ ] Other____________
3. How many Employee’s working in your organization.?[ ] Less than 250 employees [ ] 251-500 employees
[ ] 501-750 employees [ ] 751-1000 employees
[ ] More than 1000 employees
4.State your quantity that describes your usage of water for drinking per day (in Cubic meter)?[ ] Less than 1 cubic meter [ ] 1- 2 cubic meter
[ ] 2-5 cubic meter [ ] More than 5 cubic meter
5. Are you using any water purifier for drinking?[ ] Yes [ ] No
If Yes, then Go to Question No. 6 to 14If No, then Go to Question No.15 onwards
6. If YES what is the capacity of the purifiera. RO Purifier ________________
b. UV Purifier ________________
7. Which of the factor will work when you select a Water Purifier?[ ] For Removal of TDS and hardness
[ ] Removal of bacterial Contamination
[ ] Saving of Electricity [ ] Removal of Physical impurities.8. State the level of importance on above ticked factors on following scale:
( 1 – Unimportant, 7 – Very Important)Particulars 1 2 3 4 5 6 7Removal of bacterial ContaminationFor Removal of TDS and hardness
Saving of Electricity Removal of Physical impurities
9. Are you using water purifier of Eureka Forbes?[ ] Yes [ ] No
If No, then Go to Question no. 9.1If Yes, then Go to Question No. 12
9.1 If No, Which of following brand of water purifier are you using?[ ] Kent [ ] Livepure
[ ] Ion Exchange [ ] Others Specify……
9.2 What are the reasons for selecting of above ticked brand?[ ] Advanced technology [ ] Best Filtration Process
[ ] Better Taste of water [ ] Warranty and safety
[ ] Excellent Technical Support [ ] Competitve Prices
[ ] Less Maintanance [ ] If other, please specify: ___
10. Have you ever used Water Purifier of Eureka Forbes in past?[ ] Yes [ ] No
10.1 If Yes…..[ ] Happy with product and services.
[ ] Not Happy with product and services
10.2 If Not Happy, Please Specify resons for discontinuation with Eureka Forbes?[ ] Not satisfied with the product.
[ ] Not happy with services.
[ ] Satisfied but costly in maintenance.[ ] Others Please Specify_________________
11. In Future, will you buy Eureka Forbes as a brand of water purifier?[ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Can’t say
11.1 If Yes, State your level of expectations on following particulars and scale: ( 1 - Strongly Disagree, 5 - Strongly Agree)
Particulars 1 2 3 4 5
Look for Morden Technology
Products as per Need
Value for Money
Filtration Quality of Water
Excellent Service
12. Please circle the number which indicates number of years you are using water purifier of Eureka Forbes?1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15+
13. Rate the usage experience of water purifier as a brand of Eureka Forbes on the following criteria and scale:
( 1 -Strongly Disagree, 5 - Strongly Agree)
Particulars 1 2 3 4 5
High Product Durabilty
Good Water Quality
Valuable Deal
Excellent after Sales Services
14. Rate your overall satisfaction with Eureka Forbes on Following scale:(1- Highly Dissatisfactory, 7- Highly Satisfactory)
1 7
15. If, No State the reasons for not using Water Purifier?[ ] Already satisfied with quality of Water supplied by Municipality
[ ] We have our own plant of Water Purifier
[ ] if other, please specify: _____________________________
16. Which of the brand you would like to go for water purifier in future?[ ] Kent [ ] Livepure
[ ] Pure it [ ]Ion Exchange.
[ ] Other Specify_____
Personal Detail
Company Name :___________________________________
Contact No :___________________________________
Address :___________________________________
E-Mail Id :___________________________________