Description
1.To identify, and hence analyze the variables that affect the overall satisfaction of a customer visiting a Subway outlet.
2.To determine the significance (or the extent of effect) of every variable analyzed in Step 1, on the overall satisfaction level.
SUBWAY RESTAURANTS – A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction 2. Literature review 3. Theoretical framework
2 3
4
4. Objective
5
5. Research methodology
6
6. Variables
7
7. Sampling
9
8. Data
9
2
9. Analysis
17
10. Hypotheses 11. Discussion 12. Conclusion 13. References 14. Appendix
20 22 25 25
26
3
Introduction
Subway Restaurants, commonly known as Subway, is a fast food restaurant franchise that primarily sells salads and sandwiches called “subs”. Owned by Doctor's Associates, Inc. (DAI), it has over 30,016 franchised units in 88 countries as of October 2008 and is the fastest growing franchise in the world. Currently, Subway is the third largest fast food operator globally. Subway's main operations office is in Milford, Connecticut, and five regional centres support Subway's growing international operations. Many restaurants attribute Subway's fast growth to the growing concern on health by restaurant customers, a trend that Subway has taken advantage of in its marketing. Their menu items differ from country to country and market to market. Subway uses the franchisee model to expand over the globe. This survey is an attempt to find out the key variables that determine the overall satisfaction of a customer visiting a given Subway outlet. The variables were decided based on previous surveys conducted under similar themes, whose details have been given below. The results hence obtained have been analysed using the Carl-Pearson co-efficient, as to whether every independent variable in the survey influences the overall satisfaction of the customer or not. Conclusions have been drawn based on the correlation coefficients hence obtained.
4
Literature review
1) Metropole restaurants – Customer satisfaction survey Link:http://www.snap-benelux.be/documents/pdf/metropole-en.pdf “Metropole Restaurants” in London conducted a survey, which attempted to determine customer satisfaction (the dependent variable) based on the following independent variables, in addition to normal demographic variables: • • • • Service Parking space Variety Overall satisfaction
2) Seafood Emporium Restaurant – Customer satisfaction survey Link:http://www.statpac.com/onlinesurveys/Resturaunt_Customer_Satisfaction.htm ‘Seafood Emporium Restaurant’ has used the following independent variables to gauge the level of overall customer satisfaction: • • • Time Variety Overall satisfaction
5
Theoretical Framework
Accessibili ty Variety Quality of food Delivery time Pricing Special offers Social status Other items
Parking space
Overall customer satisfaction
Ambience Gender
Objective
6
Problem Statement
What are the factors that determine the overall satisfaction of a customer visiting a Subway outlet?
Research Objective
1. To identify, and hence analyze the variables that affect the overall
satisfaction of a customer visiting a Subway outlet. 2. To determine the significance (or the extent of effect) of every variable analyzed in Step 1, on the overall satisfaction level.
Research Scope
This research covers most of the customers who visited the ‘Juhu’ outlet of Subway between the 7th and the 8th of December, 2008 (both days inclusive), as well as other Subway customers, who at the time of filling the survey were not in a Subway outlet.
7
Research methodology
Questionnaire: The questionnaire consisted of fifteen (15) questions in all. The respondents were initially asked to fill in their demographic information, following which their opinion on the various factors, determining their overall satisfaction, was sought. We used the ordinal (ranking) scales to rate the variables in the survey, the scale spanning from “Poor” to “Excellent” as ranking options. Reliability: The reliability of the questionnaire and consequently, the survey, was done by taking into account the independent variables. Applying ‘Cronbach's Alpha Test’ yielded a reliability value of .905.
Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 62 2 64 % 96.9 3.1 100.0
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.
Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha .905 N of Items 11
8
Variables
The main variables involved in the research are: Demographic variables 1. Name 2. Age 3. Gender Survey variables 4. Accessibility 5. Variety 6. Quality of food 7. Delivery time 8. Pricing 9. Special offers 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Social status Other items Parking space Ambience Overall satisfaction
Variable Categorization The variables are categorized into the following different types of variables: Independent variables:
• • • • Gender Accessibility Variety Quality of food
9
• • • • • • •
Delivery time Pricing Special offers Social status Other items Parking space Ambience
Dependent Variables
• Overall satisfaction
Operational Definitions
1. Accessibility: Accessibility refers to the distance a customer has
to travel from residence, to reach the nearest Subway outlet. We decided upon a radius of 3km as the limit, beyond which an outlet is said to be inaccessible.
2. Variety: The assortment of items offered in a Subway outlet
constitutes the rating of this variable. This also includes the customer’s ability to customize his menu, for we felt it contributes more to variety.
3. Quality of food: This represents the quality of food served, as
regards taste, hygiene and nutrition value.
4. Delivery time: Delivery time refers to the time gap between the
placing of an order, and the completion of all formalities, including billing.
5. Pricing: This question deals with the level of affordability of the
food available.
6. Special offers: Special offers refer to the bundled offers that
come with a sub / salad a customer buys. Freebies distributed are included too.
7. Social status: This variable implies the snob value associated
with brand Subway. We wanted to find out whether the name “Subway” prompts people to prefer the food there.
10
8. Other items: This refers to the other items that are available
with the meal/sub/salad that the customer buys. This includes cold beverages, cookies, tea, coffee and other items that are specific to certain outlets.
9. Parking space: This refers to whether the customers are
concerned about the extent of parking space available around a Subway outlet.
10. Overall satisfaction: This determines the overall satisfaction of
a customer, whose decision, the above independent variables may or may not have influenced.
11. Age,
gender and income: These were the demographic variables that were captured in the survey.
11
Sampling
Target population: Subway customers in the age group of 20 - 40. Sampling Frame: Online and print questionnaires were circulated to the target population. Sampling technique: Convenience Expected sample size: 70 Execution: Online and print surveys were conducted and 62 (valid and proper) responses were captured. Response Rate: The survey was conducted on 70 people, but we had to delete those entries which were either incomplete or invalid. The valid and proper entries were 62 in number. Overall: 62 responses in the population of 70
Data
Frequency Tables
Accessibility Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 10 24 16 12 62 2 64 Percent 15.6 37.5 25.0 18.8 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 16.1 38.7 25.8 19.4 100.0 Percent 16.1 54.8 80.6 100.0
12
Variety Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 26 8 14 14 62 2 64 Percent 40.6 12.5 21.9 21.9 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 41.9 12.9 22.6 22.6 100.0 Percent 41.9 54.8 77.4 100.0
Quality of food Cumulative Frequency Valid Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 12 36 14 62 2 64 Percent 18.8 56.2 21.9 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 19.4 58.1 22.6 100.0 Percent 19.4 77.4 100.0
13
DeliveryTime Cumulative Frequency Valid Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 8 38 16 62 2 64 Percent 12.5 59.4 25.0 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 12.9 61.3 25.8 100.0 Percent 12.9 74.2 100.0
Pricing Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 14 18 22 8 62 2 64 Percent 21.9 28.1 34.4 12.5 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 22.6 29.0 35.5 12.9 100.0 Percent 22.6 51.6 87.1 100.0
14
SpecialOffer Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 20 16 12 14 62 2 64 Percent 31.2 25.0 18.8 21.9 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 32.3 25.8 19.4 22.6 100.0 Percent 32.3 58.1 77.4 100.0
SocialStatus Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Total Missing Total System 56 6 62 2 64 Percent 87.5 9.4 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 90.3 9.7 100.0 Percent 90.3 100.0
15
Others
Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 8 10 6 38 62 2 64 Percent 12.5 15.6 9.4 59.4 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 12.9 16.1 9.7 61.3 100.0 Percent 12.9 29.0 38.7 100.0
ParkingSpace Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Total Missing Total System 48 14 62 2 64 Percent 75.0 21.9 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 77.4 22.6 100.0 Percent 77.4 100.0
16
OverallSatisfaction Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 2 4 28 28 62 2 64 Percent 3.1 6.2 43.8 43.8 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 3.2 6.5 45.2 45.2 100.0 Percent 3.2 9.7 54.8 100.0
Ambience Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 16 24 16 6 62 2 64 Percent 25.0 37.5 25.0 9.4 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 25.8 38.7 25.8 9.7 100.0 Percent 25.8 64.5 90.3 100.0
17
Gender Cumulative Frequency Valid Male Female Total Missing Total System 31 31 62 2 64 Percent 48.4 48.4 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 50.0 50.0 100.0 Percent 50.0 100.0
18
Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive Statistics N Accessibility Variety QualityOfFood DeliveryTime Pricing SpecialOffer SocialStatus OtherItems ParkingSpace OverallSatisfaction Ambience Gender Valid N (listwise) 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 Minimum 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Maximum 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 Mean 2.4839 2.2581 3.0323 3.1290 2.3871 2.3226 1.0968 3.1935 1.2258 3.3226 2.1935 1.5000 Std. Deviation .98749 1.22723 .65205 .61361 .98105 1.15623 .29806 1.12845 .42153 .74160 .93806 .50408
19
Analysis
Regression
Variables Entered/Removedb Variables Model 1 Variables Entered Gender, ParkingSpace, Ambience, OtherItems, SocialStatus, Variety, DeliveryTime, Pricing, QualityOfFood, Accessibility, SpecialOffera a. All requested variables entered. b. Dependent Variable: OverallSatisfaction . Enter Removed Method
Model Summary Adjusted R Model 1 R .915a R Square .838 Square .802 Std. Error of the Estimate .33001
a. Predictors: (Constant), Gender, ParkingSpace, Ambience, OtherItems, SocialStatus, Variety, DeliveryTime, Pricing, QualityOfFood, Accessibility, SpecialOffer
20
ANOVAb Model 1 Regression Residual Total Sum of Squares 28.103 5.445 33.548 df 11 50 61 Mean Square 2.555 .109 F 23.459 Sig. .000a
a. Predictors: (Constant), Gender, ParkingSpace, Ambience, OtherItems, SocialStatus, Variety, DeliveryTime, Pricing, QualityOfFood, Accessibility, SpecialOffer b. Dependent Variable: OverallSatisfaction
Coefficientsa Standardized Unstandardized Coefficients Model 1 (Constant) Accessibility Variety QualityOfFood DeliveryTime Pricing SpecialOffer SocialStatus OtherItems ParkingSpace Ambience B 1.588 .553 .029 -.225 .478 .036 .182 -.183 -.011 -.771 -.020 Std. Error .378 .158 .053 .226 .202 .151 .161 .207 .116 .366 .050 .737 .048 -.198 .395 .048 .284 -.074 -.016 -.438 -.025 Coefficients Beta t 4.203 3.492 .548 -.996 2.368 .240 1.131 -.884 -.093 -2.107 -.395 Sig. .000 .001 .586 .324 .022 .811 .264 .381 .926 .040 .695
21
ANOVAb Model 1 Regression Residual Total Sum of Squares 28.103 5.445 33.548 df 11 50 61 Mean Square 2.555 .109 F 23.459 Sig. .000a
a. Predictors: (Constant), Gender, ParkingSpace, Ambience, OtherItems, SocialStatus, Variety, DeliveryTime, Pricing, QualityOfFood, Accessibility, SpecialOffer b. Dependent Variable: OverallSatisfaction
Coefficientsa Standardized Unstandardized Coefficients Model 1 (Constant) Accessibility Variety QualityOfFood DeliveryTime Pricing SpecialOffer SocialStatus OtherItems ParkingSpace Ambience B 1.588 .553 .029 -.225 .478 .036 .182 -.183 -.011 -.771 -.020 Std. Error .378 .158 .053 .226 .202 .151 .161 .207 .116 .366 .050 .737 .048 -.198 .395 .048 .284 -.074 -.016 -.438 -.025 Coefficients Beta t 4.203 3.492 .548 -.996 2.368 .240 1.131 -.884 -.093 -2.107 -.395 Sig. .000 .001 .586 .324 .022 .811 .264 .381 .926 .040 .695
22
Correlation
Overall Satisfaction Accessibility Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Variety Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N QualityOfFood Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N DeliveryTime Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pricing Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N SpecialOffer Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N SocialStatus Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N OtherItems Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N ParkingSpace Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Ambience Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) 0.24 0.06 0.50** 0.00 62.00 0.79** 0.00 62.00 0.23 0.02 62.00 0.79** 0.00 62.00 0.82** 0.00 62.00 0.77* 0.00 62.00 0.88** 0.00 62.00 0.56** 0.00 62.00 0.86** 0.00 62.00
23
N Gender Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2tailed).
62.00 0.13 0.31 62.00
Hypotheses
In this section we develop hypothesis derived from the research questions:
1. Ho: There is no significant relationship between accessibility of
the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between accessibility of the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
2. Ho: There is no significant relationship between the variety of
menu and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between the variety of menu and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
3. Ho: There is no significant relationship between the quality of
food offered and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between the quality of food offered and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
24
4. Ho: There is no significant relationship between order delivery
time and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between order delivery time and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
5. Ho: There is no significant relationship between price of the menu
and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between price of the menu and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
6. Ho: There is no significant relationship between special offers at
the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between special offers at the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
7. Ho: There is no significant relationship between gain in social
status and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between gain in social status and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
8. Ho: There is no significant relationship between other items (like
pastries, cookies, beverages) available and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between other items (like pastries, cookies, beverages) available and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
9. Ho: There is no significant relationship between parking space
available and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
25
H1: There is significant relationship between parking space available and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
10. Ho: There is no significant relationship between ambience of the
outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between ambience of the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
11. Ho: There is no significant relationship between gender and
overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between gender and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
Discussion
Hypothesis results and Interpretation 1. Ho: There is no significant relationship between accessibility of the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject The correlation between the two is .86, which is significant at 1% level, showing that accessibility of the outlet does affect customer satisfaction. About 16% percent of the people feel that the accessibility of a Subway outlet is poor. In this regard, Subway could, depending on market conditions, plan to open new outlets. 2. Ho: There is no significant relationship between the variety of menu and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject
26
The correlation between the two is .56, which is significant at 1% level of significance, and shows that the variety of items in the menu does have a strong influence on the overall customer satisfaction. Close to around 40% of people feel that the variety of food can improve. To achieve this, Subway could consider expanding the cuisine served.
3. Ho: There is no significant relationship between the quality of food offered and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject
The correlation between the two is .88, which is significant at 1% level of significance, showing that there is a very strong correlation between the quality of food offered and the level of satisfaction of the customer. None of the customers said that the food in Subway was poor. This proves that Subway has always been nutrition and quality conscious in the food that it serves to the people.
4. Ho: There is no significant relationship between order delivery time and tracking options and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject
The correlation between the two is .77, which is significant at 1% level of significance, which implies that better the delivery time, greater the customer satisfaction. Here again, no customer rated delivery time as poor. This can be attributed to the optimum number of Subway staff allocated to any given outlet.
5. Ho: There is no significant relationship between price of the menu and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject
27
The correlation between the two is .82 which is significant at 1% level of significance, which suggests that users lay enough emphasis on price of the menu. Around 75% of the customers said that the pricing is either average or beyond average, with regard to the level of affordability.
6. Ho: There is no significant relationship between special offers at the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject
The correlation between the two is .79 which is significant at 1% level of significance, showing that an increase in the presence of special offers does influence customer satisfaction. But, around 32% of the people do see room for improvement, in the extent and duration of special offers presently being made available by Subway.
7. Ho: There is no significant relationship between gain in social status and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Accept
The correlation between the two is .23 which is not significant at 1% level of significance, showing that customers don’t think that there will be gain in social status. 90% of the customers do not identify Subway as a status symbol.
8. Ho: There is no significant relationship between other items (like pastries, cookies, beverages) available and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject
28
The correlation between the two is .79 which is significant at 1% level of significance, showing that users lay enough emphasis on availability of other items (like pastries, cookies, and beverages). Around 88% of the customers feel that the variety of other items in the menu is either average or beyond average.
9. Ho: There is no significant relationship between parking space available and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject
The correlation between the two is .50 which is significant at 1% level of significance, showing that customers lay enough emphasis on parking space available. Most of the customers feel that Subway outlets do not offer enough parking facilities. We conclude that this the reality fast-food lovers in Mumbai will have to put up with.
10. Ho: There is no significant relationship between ambience of the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Accept
The correlation between the two is .24 which is insignificant at 1% level of significance, showing that customers don’t lay enough emphasis on ambience of the outlet. This implies people come to Subway for something more than just the ambience, for the bare minimum requirement of ambience is attended to, at every Subway outlet.
11. Ho: There is no significant relationship between gender and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Accept
29
The correlation between the two is .13 which is insignificant at 1% level of significance, showing that the satisfaction level does not depend on the gender of the customer. The gender split is also the same, in the number of people surveyed. This is because either gender has become conscious about the need for nutrition value and negligible fat content in food.
Conclusion
The ‘convenience’ sampling technique was used to determine the overall satisfaction of a customer visiting (and dining) in a given Subway outlet. The survey targeted 70 respondents, 62 of which were proper and valid entries with a reliability of about 90%. The independent variables, on which the overall satisfaction is dependent, were identified from previous surveys conducted on similar themes. The data collected was then analyzed. The regression analyses and correlation co-efficients of each independent variable with customer satisfaction (the dependent variable) was then found out, and conclusions drawn as to whether it particularly influenced customer satisfaction.
References
1) Business Research Methods – Cooper and Schindler, Tata McGraw Hill. 2)http://www.snap-benelux.be/documents/pdf/metropole-en.pdf * 3)http://www.statpac.com/onlinesurveys/Resturaunt_Customer_Satisfaction.htm *
30
*Referred the Internet, to try and identify variables from previous surveys on similar themes.
Appendix
Questionnaire:
1. Name & age: ?
2. Gender: o Male o Female
31
3. Accessibility of the Subway outlet (Poor – least accessible; Excellent – most accessible):
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
4. Variety of the menu:
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
5. Quality of the food being offered at the outlet:
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
6. Time taken to deliver the order (Poor – frequent delays; Excellent – minimal delays):
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
32
7. Price of the menu (Poor – not affordable; Excellent economical):
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
8. Special offers at the outlet (Poor – very minimal; Excellent – Frequent and attractive offers):
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
9. Gain in social status by visiting the outlet (Poor – Never considered it a status symbol; Excellent – a strong sense of Subway as a status symbol):
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
10. Availability of other items such as beverages, pastries, cookies (Poor – minimal; Excellent – Easy availability and good variety):
o
Poor
o Average
33
o Good o Excellent
11. Parking space available:
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
12. Ambience of the outlet:
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
13. Overall satisfaction level at the Subway outlet:
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
34
doc_812508502.doc
1.To identify, and hence analyze the variables that affect the overall satisfaction of a customer visiting a Subway outlet.
2.To determine the significance (or the extent of effect) of every variable analyzed in Step 1, on the overall satisfaction level.
SUBWAY RESTAURANTS – A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction 2. Literature review 3. Theoretical framework
2 3
4
4. Objective
5
5. Research methodology
6
6. Variables
7
7. Sampling
9
8. Data
9
2
9. Analysis
17
10. Hypotheses 11. Discussion 12. Conclusion 13. References 14. Appendix
20 22 25 25
26
3
Introduction
Subway Restaurants, commonly known as Subway, is a fast food restaurant franchise that primarily sells salads and sandwiches called “subs”. Owned by Doctor's Associates, Inc. (DAI), it has over 30,016 franchised units in 88 countries as of October 2008 and is the fastest growing franchise in the world. Currently, Subway is the third largest fast food operator globally. Subway's main operations office is in Milford, Connecticut, and five regional centres support Subway's growing international operations. Many restaurants attribute Subway's fast growth to the growing concern on health by restaurant customers, a trend that Subway has taken advantage of in its marketing. Their menu items differ from country to country and market to market. Subway uses the franchisee model to expand over the globe. This survey is an attempt to find out the key variables that determine the overall satisfaction of a customer visiting a given Subway outlet. The variables were decided based on previous surveys conducted under similar themes, whose details have been given below. The results hence obtained have been analysed using the Carl-Pearson co-efficient, as to whether every independent variable in the survey influences the overall satisfaction of the customer or not. Conclusions have been drawn based on the correlation coefficients hence obtained.
4
Literature review
1) Metropole restaurants – Customer satisfaction survey Link:http://www.snap-benelux.be/documents/pdf/metropole-en.pdf “Metropole Restaurants” in London conducted a survey, which attempted to determine customer satisfaction (the dependent variable) based on the following independent variables, in addition to normal demographic variables: • • • • Service Parking space Variety Overall satisfaction
2) Seafood Emporium Restaurant – Customer satisfaction survey Link:http://www.statpac.com/onlinesurveys/Resturaunt_Customer_Satisfaction.htm ‘Seafood Emporium Restaurant’ has used the following independent variables to gauge the level of overall customer satisfaction: • • • Time Variety Overall satisfaction
5
Theoretical Framework
Accessibili ty Variety Quality of food Delivery time Pricing Special offers Social status Other items
Parking space
Overall customer satisfaction
Ambience Gender
Objective
6
Problem Statement
What are the factors that determine the overall satisfaction of a customer visiting a Subway outlet?
Research Objective
1. To identify, and hence analyze the variables that affect the overall
satisfaction of a customer visiting a Subway outlet. 2. To determine the significance (or the extent of effect) of every variable analyzed in Step 1, on the overall satisfaction level.
Research Scope
This research covers most of the customers who visited the ‘Juhu’ outlet of Subway between the 7th and the 8th of December, 2008 (both days inclusive), as well as other Subway customers, who at the time of filling the survey were not in a Subway outlet.
7
Research methodology
Questionnaire: The questionnaire consisted of fifteen (15) questions in all. The respondents were initially asked to fill in their demographic information, following which their opinion on the various factors, determining their overall satisfaction, was sought. We used the ordinal (ranking) scales to rate the variables in the survey, the scale spanning from “Poor” to “Excellent” as ranking options. Reliability: The reliability of the questionnaire and consequently, the survey, was done by taking into account the independent variables. Applying ‘Cronbach's Alpha Test’ yielded a reliability value of .905.
Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 62 2 64 % 96.9 3.1 100.0
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.
Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha .905 N of Items 11
8
Variables
The main variables involved in the research are: Demographic variables 1. Name 2. Age 3. Gender Survey variables 4. Accessibility 5. Variety 6. Quality of food 7. Delivery time 8. Pricing 9. Special offers 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Social status Other items Parking space Ambience Overall satisfaction
Variable Categorization The variables are categorized into the following different types of variables: Independent variables:
• • • • Gender Accessibility Variety Quality of food
9
• • • • • • •
Delivery time Pricing Special offers Social status Other items Parking space Ambience
Dependent Variables
• Overall satisfaction
Operational Definitions
1. Accessibility: Accessibility refers to the distance a customer has
to travel from residence, to reach the nearest Subway outlet. We decided upon a radius of 3km as the limit, beyond which an outlet is said to be inaccessible.
2. Variety: The assortment of items offered in a Subway outlet
constitutes the rating of this variable. This also includes the customer’s ability to customize his menu, for we felt it contributes more to variety.
3. Quality of food: This represents the quality of food served, as
regards taste, hygiene and nutrition value.
4. Delivery time: Delivery time refers to the time gap between the
placing of an order, and the completion of all formalities, including billing.
5. Pricing: This question deals with the level of affordability of the
food available.
6. Special offers: Special offers refer to the bundled offers that
come with a sub / salad a customer buys. Freebies distributed are included too.
7. Social status: This variable implies the snob value associated
with brand Subway. We wanted to find out whether the name “Subway” prompts people to prefer the food there.
10
8. Other items: This refers to the other items that are available
with the meal/sub/salad that the customer buys. This includes cold beverages, cookies, tea, coffee and other items that are specific to certain outlets.
9. Parking space: This refers to whether the customers are
concerned about the extent of parking space available around a Subway outlet.
10. Overall satisfaction: This determines the overall satisfaction of
a customer, whose decision, the above independent variables may or may not have influenced.
11. Age,
gender and income: These were the demographic variables that were captured in the survey.
11
Sampling
Target population: Subway customers in the age group of 20 - 40. Sampling Frame: Online and print questionnaires were circulated to the target population. Sampling technique: Convenience Expected sample size: 70 Execution: Online and print surveys were conducted and 62 (valid and proper) responses were captured. Response Rate: The survey was conducted on 70 people, but we had to delete those entries which were either incomplete or invalid. The valid and proper entries were 62 in number. Overall: 62 responses in the population of 70
Data
Frequency Tables
Accessibility Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 10 24 16 12 62 2 64 Percent 15.6 37.5 25.0 18.8 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 16.1 38.7 25.8 19.4 100.0 Percent 16.1 54.8 80.6 100.0
12
Variety Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 26 8 14 14 62 2 64 Percent 40.6 12.5 21.9 21.9 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 41.9 12.9 22.6 22.6 100.0 Percent 41.9 54.8 77.4 100.0
Quality of food Cumulative Frequency Valid Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 12 36 14 62 2 64 Percent 18.8 56.2 21.9 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 19.4 58.1 22.6 100.0 Percent 19.4 77.4 100.0
13
DeliveryTime Cumulative Frequency Valid Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 8 38 16 62 2 64 Percent 12.5 59.4 25.0 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 12.9 61.3 25.8 100.0 Percent 12.9 74.2 100.0
Pricing Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 14 18 22 8 62 2 64 Percent 21.9 28.1 34.4 12.5 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 22.6 29.0 35.5 12.9 100.0 Percent 22.6 51.6 87.1 100.0
14
SpecialOffer Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 20 16 12 14 62 2 64 Percent 31.2 25.0 18.8 21.9 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 32.3 25.8 19.4 22.6 100.0 Percent 32.3 58.1 77.4 100.0
SocialStatus Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Total Missing Total System 56 6 62 2 64 Percent 87.5 9.4 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 90.3 9.7 100.0 Percent 90.3 100.0
15
Others
Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 8 10 6 38 62 2 64 Percent 12.5 15.6 9.4 59.4 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 12.9 16.1 9.7 61.3 100.0 Percent 12.9 29.0 38.7 100.0
ParkingSpace Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Total Missing Total System 48 14 62 2 64 Percent 75.0 21.9 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 77.4 22.6 100.0 Percent 77.4 100.0
16
OverallSatisfaction Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 2 4 28 28 62 2 64 Percent 3.1 6.2 43.8 43.8 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 3.2 6.5 45.2 45.2 100.0 Percent 3.2 9.7 54.8 100.0
Ambience Cumulative Frequency Valid Poor Average Good Excellent Total Missing Total System 16 24 16 6 62 2 64 Percent 25.0 37.5 25.0 9.4 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 25.8 38.7 25.8 9.7 100.0 Percent 25.8 64.5 90.3 100.0
17
Gender Cumulative Frequency Valid Male Female Total Missing Total System 31 31 62 2 64 Percent 48.4 48.4 96.9 3.1 100.0 Valid Percent 50.0 50.0 100.0 Percent 50.0 100.0
18
Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive Statistics N Accessibility Variety QualityOfFood DeliveryTime Pricing SpecialOffer SocialStatus OtherItems ParkingSpace OverallSatisfaction Ambience Gender Valid N (listwise) 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 Minimum 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Maximum 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 Mean 2.4839 2.2581 3.0323 3.1290 2.3871 2.3226 1.0968 3.1935 1.2258 3.3226 2.1935 1.5000 Std. Deviation .98749 1.22723 .65205 .61361 .98105 1.15623 .29806 1.12845 .42153 .74160 .93806 .50408
19
Analysis
Regression
Variables Entered/Removedb Variables Model 1 Variables Entered Gender, ParkingSpace, Ambience, OtherItems, SocialStatus, Variety, DeliveryTime, Pricing, QualityOfFood, Accessibility, SpecialOffera a. All requested variables entered. b. Dependent Variable: OverallSatisfaction . Enter Removed Method
Model Summary Adjusted R Model 1 R .915a R Square .838 Square .802 Std. Error of the Estimate .33001
a. Predictors: (Constant), Gender, ParkingSpace, Ambience, OtherItems, SocialStatus, Variety, DeliveryTime, Pricing, QualityOfFood, Accessibility, SpecialOffer
20
ANOVAb Model 1 Regression Residual Total Sum of Squares 28.103 5.445 33.548 df 11 50 61 Mean Square 2.555 .109 F 23.459 Sig. .000a
a. Predictors: (Constant), Gender, ParkingSpace, Ambience, OtherItems, SocialStatus, Variety, DeliveryTime, Pricing, QualityOfFood, Accessibility, SpecialOffer b. Dependent Variable: OverallSatisfaction
Coefficientsa Standardized Unstandardized Coefficients Model 1 (Constant) Accessibility Variety QualityOfFood DeliveryTime Pricing SpecialOffer SocialStatus OtherItems ParkingSpace Ambience B 1.588 .553 .029 -.225 .478 .036 .182 -.183 -.011 -.771 -.020 Std. Error .378 .158 .053 .226 .202 .151 .161 .207 .116 .366 .050 .737 .048 -.198 .395 .048 .284 -.074 -.016 -.438 -.025 Coefficients Beta t 4.203 3.492 .548 -.996 2.368 .240 1.131 -.884 -.093 -2.107 -.395 Sig. .000 .001 .586 .324 .022 .811 .264 .381 .926 .040 .695
21
ANOVAb Model 1 Regression Residual Total Sum of Squares 28.103 5.445 33.548 df 11 50 61 Mean Square 2.555 .109 F 23.459 Sig. .000a
a. Predictors: (Constant), Gender, ParkingSpace, Ambience, OtherItems, SocialStatus, Variety, DeliveryTime, Pricing, QualityOfFood, Accessibility, SpecialOffer b. Dependent Variable: OverallSatisfaction
Coefficientsa Standardized Unstandardized Coefficients Model 1 (Constant) Accessibility Variety QualityOfFood DeliveryTime Pricing SpecialOffer SocialStatus OtherItems ParkingSpace Ambience B 1.588 .553 .029 -.225 .478 .036 .182 -.183 -.011 -.771 -.020 Std. Error .378 .158 .053 .226 .202 .151 .161 .207 .116 .366 .050 .737 .048 -.198 .395 .048 .284 -.074 -.016 -.438 -.025 Coefficients Beta t 4.203 3.492 .548 -.996 2.368 .240 1.131 -.884 -.093 -2.107 -.395 Sig. .000 .001 .586 .324 .022 .811 .264 .381 .926 .040 .695
22
Correlation
Overall Satisfaction Accessibility Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Variety Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N QualityOfFood Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N DeliveryTime Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pricing Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N SpecialOffer Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N SocialStatus Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N OtherItems Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N ParkingSpace Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Ambience Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) 0.24 0.06 0.50** 0.00 62.00 0.79** 0.00 62.00 0.23 0.02 62.00 0.79** 0.00 62.00 0.82** 0.00 62.00 0.77* 0.00 62.00 0.88** 0.00 62.00 0.56** 0.00 62.00 0.86** 0.00 62.00
23
N Gender Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2tailed).
62.00 0.13 0.31 62.00
Hypotheses
In this section we develop hypothesis derived from the research questions:
1. Ho: There is no significant relationship between accessibility of
the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between accessibility of the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
2. Ho: There is no significant relationship between the variety of
menu and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between the variety of menu and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
3. Ho: There is no significant relationship between the quality of
food offered and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between the quality of food offered and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
24
4. Ho: There is no significant relationship between order delivery
time and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between order delivery time and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
5. Ho: There is no significant relationship between price of the menu
and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between price of the menu and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
6. Ho: There is no significant relationship between special offers at
the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between special offers at the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
7. Ho: There is no significant relationship between gain in social
status and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between gain in social status and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
8. Ho: There is no significant relationship between other items (like
pastries, cookies, beverages) available and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between other items (like pastries, cookies, beverages) available and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
9. Ho: There is no significant relationship between parking space
available and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
25
H1: There is significant relationship between parking space available and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
10. Ho: There is no significant relationship between ambience of the
outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between ambience of the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
11. Ho: There is no significant relationship between gender and
overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. H1: There is significant relationship between gender and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet.
Discussion
Hypothesis results and Interpretation 1. Ho: There is no significant relationship between accessibility of the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject The correlation between the two is .86, which is significant at 1% level, showing that accessibility of the outlet does affect customer satisfaction. About 16% percent of the people feel that the accessibility of a Subway outlet is poor. In this regard, Subway could, depending on market conditions, plan to open new outlets. 2. Ho: There is no significant relationship between the variety of menu and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject
26
The correlation between the two is .56, which is significant at 1% level of significance, and shows that the variety of items in the menu does have a strong influence on the overall customer satisfaction. Close to around 40% of people feel that the variety of food can improve. To achieve this, Subway could consider expanding the cuisine served.
3. Ho: There is no significant relationship between the quality of food offered and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject
The correlation between the two is .88, which is significant at 1% level of significance, showing that there is a very strong correlation between the quality of food offered and the level of satisfaction of the customer. None of the customers said that the food in Subway was poor. This proves that Subway has always been nutrition and quality conscious in the food that it serves to the people.
4. Ho: There is no significant relationship between order delivery time and tracking options and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject
The correlation between the two is .77, which is significant at 1% level of significance, which implies that better the delivery time, greater the customer satisfaction. Here again, no customer rated delivery time as poor. This can be attributed to the optimum number of Subway staff allocated to any given outlet.
5. Ho: There is no significant relationship between price of the menu and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject
27
The correlation between the two is .82 which is significant at 1% level of significance, which suggests that users lay enough emphasis on price of the menu. Around 75% of the customers said that the pricing is either average or beyond average, with regard to the level of affordability.
6. Ho: There is no significant relationship between special offers at the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject
The correlation between the two is .79 which is significant at 1% level of significance, showing that an increase in the presence of special offers does influence customer satisfaction. But, around 32% of the people do see room for improvement, in the extent and duration of special offers presently being made available by Subway.
7. Ho: There is no significant relationship between gain in social status and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Accept
The correlation between the two is .23 which is not significant at 1% level of significance, showing that customers don’t think that there will be gain in social status. 90% of the customers do not identify Subway as a status symbol.
8. Ho: There is no significant relationship between other items (like pastries, cookies, beverages) available and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject
28
The correlation between the two is .79 which is significant at 1% level of significance, showing that users lay enough emphasis on availability of other items (like pastries, cookies, and beverages). Around 88% of the customers feel that the variety of other items in the menu is either average or beyond average.
9. Ho: There is no significant relationship between parking space available and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Reject
The correlation between the two is .50 which is significant at 1% level of significance, showing that customers lay enough emphasis on parking space available. Most of the customers feel that Subway outlets do not offer enough parking facilities. We conclude that this the reality fast-food lovers in Mumbai will have to put up with.
10. Ho: There is no significant relationship between ambience of the outlet and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Accept
The correlation between the two is .24 which is insignificant at 1% level of significance, showing that customers don’t lay enough emphasis on ambience of the outlet. This implies people come to Subway for something more than just the ambience, for the bare minimum requirement of ambience is attended to, at every Subway outlet.
11. Ho: There is no significant relationship between gender and overall satisfaction of the customer at the subway outlet. Result: Accept
29
The correlation between the two is .13 which is insignificant at 1% level of significance, showing that the satisfaction level does not depend on the gender of the customer. The gender split is also the same, in the number of people surveyed. This is because either gender has become conscious about the need for nutrition value and negligible fat content in food.
Conclusion
The ‘convenience’ sampling technique was used to determine the overall satisfaction of a customer visiting (and dining) in a given Subway outlet. The survey targeted 70 respondents, 62 of which were proper and valid entries with a reliability of about 90%. The independent variables, on which the overall satisfaction is dependent, were identified from previous surveys conducted on similar themes. The data collected was then analyzed. The regression analyses and correlation co-efficients of each independent variable with customer satisfaction (the dependent variable) was then found out, and conclusions drawn as to whether it particularly influenced customer satisfaction.
References
1) Business Research Methods – Cooper and Schindler, Tata McGraw Hill. 2)http://www.snap-benelux.be/documents/pdf/metropole-en.pdf * 3)http://www.statpac.com/onlinesurveys/Resturaunt_Customer_Satisfaction.htm *
30
*Referred the Internet, to try and identify variables from previous surveys on similar themes.
Appendix
Questionnaire:
1. Name & age: ?
2. Gender: o Male o Female
31
3. Accessibility of the Subway outlet (Poor – least accessible; Excellent – most accessible):
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
4. Variety of the menu:
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
5. Quality of the food being offered at the outlet:
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
6. Time taken to deliver the order (Poor – frequent delays; Excellent – minimal delays):
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
32
7. Price of the menu (Poor – not affordable; Excellent economical):
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
8. Special offers at the outlet (Poor – very minimal; Excellent – Frequent and attractive offers):
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
9. Gain in social status by visiting the outlet (Poor – Never considered it a status symbol; Excellent – a strong sense of Subway as a status symbol):
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
10. Availability of other items such as beverages, pastries, cookies (Poor – minimal; Excellent – Easy availability and good variety):
o
Poor
o Average
33
o Good o Excellent
11. Parking space available:
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
12. Ambience of the outlet:
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
13. Overall satisfaction level at the Subway outlet:
o
Poor
o Average o Good o Excellent
34
doc_812508502.doc