rm grocery final

1 | P a g e

AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF STORE CHOICE BEHAVIOUR OF WOMEN

CONSUMER IN THE PURCHASE OF GROCERY

Submitted By:-

AJIT VINOD DUBEY

MMS15

Rustomjee Business School

Rustom Irani Marg, Rustomjee Acres

Dahisar (West),

Mumbai- 400068

2 | P a g e

December 2013.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to express our sincere gratitude to all those who helped

in making this project a success.

Special thanks to our Dean, Dr. Hanif Kanjer (Rustomjee Business

School) for his timely guidance and support throughout the research

project.

Our mentors Prof. Shipra Bhatia, Prof. Charmi Shah and other faculty

members have given their valuable time and ideas. We express our

heartfelt thanks to them.

Finally we take this opportunity to thank all the people who participated

in our survey.

3 | P a g e

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents CHAPTER 1 ......................................................................................................................................................... 4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................ 4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5

MAJOR FINDINGS 5

CONCLUSIONS 5

RECOMMENDATIONS 6

CHAPTER 2 ......................................................................................................................................................... 7

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................. 7

THE PURPOSE / RATIONALE OF RESEARCH 8

INTRODUCTION 8

LITERATURE REVIEW 10

CHAPTER 3 ........................................................................................................................................................14

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................14

OBJECTIVE 15

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 15

DATA SOURCES 16

SAMPLING PLAN 16

CHAPTER 4 ........................................................................................................................................................17

HYPOTHESIS ......................................................................................................................................................17

DATA ANALYSIS 18

PROPOSED HYPOTHESIS 63

4 | P a g e

CHAPTER 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

5 | P a g e

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

We decided to have a market research on jeans buying behavior of the consumers of

Mumbai. This study was carried out to determine different factors that affect the purchase

decision for jeans and consumer preferences for different brands. During the event we

decided to get feedback from customers who normally visit various types of outlets for the

purchase, so that appropriate primary data could be collected though questionnaire.

MAJOR FINDINGS

CONCLUSIONS

Taking into account the responses of the respondents and analyzing them using statistical

measures it can be concluded that

a. Satisfaction levels of men and women while buying jeans is more or less the same across

parameters like durability, sizes, after sales service, shades and colors.

b. Around 33% people purchase jeans at least once in six months.

c. Jeans are purchased more on an average by customers below the age of 23. d. Purchase

of jeans based on the brands is independent of the age group.

6 | P a g e

RECOMMENDATIONS

a. Since satisfaction levels across gender is more or less the same over

durability, sizes, after sales services, shades and colors, comfort and price,

jeans manufacturers should focus on these parameters in order to woo

customers and widen their customer base to increase revenues.

b. Since 33% of the customers purchase jeans once in six months in

addition to occasions, jean manufacturers can add some bimonthly and

semiannual discounts and sales in order to boost sales and change

purchasing patterns of customers keeping in mind the parameters

customers look for while buying jeans.

c. Since the average age of customers purchasing jeans is 23 years

which may not actually be a representative of the general population yet it

is indicative of the fact that promotions should be made keeping the youth

factor in mind as jeans project a youth image among people.

d. Since purchase of jeans based on brands is independent of age

group, instead of focusing on differentiating the brand on age groups,

manufacturers should differentiate their brand on the ranges, color, comfort

they provide to their customers.

e. Since both men and women both favor parameters like comfort,

manufacturers should focus on making their products available at better prices

to shift the focus from unbranded jeans to their brands.

f. Since satisfaction levels are low in case of after sales service, manufacturers should improve on the after

sales service they provide.

7 | P a g e

CHAPTER 2

INTRODUCTION

8 | P a g e

REPORT MAIN BODY

THE PURPOSE / RATIONALE OF RESEARCH

(a) To evaluate the market share o f hyper-markets, small format organised stores and

unorganised (kirana) stores today for food and grocery (F&G) shopping;

(b) To find out the attitudes and preferences of shoppers to different retail formats;

(c) To find out the shopping patterns and spread of the monthly basket across different

formats.

INTRODUCTION

According to ICRIER (2005), food and grocery is the largest retail sector

worldwide.Food and grocery presents the most significant potential in the Indian context

also.In the overall retail sales pie, food and grocery stood at 59.5% share in 2007. It is

the single most dominant category in private consumption in India, valued at 7,920 bn.In

the organized retail segment, Food and Grocery is valued at 90 bn. This organized

market constitutes barely 1.1% of the total food and grocery retail market (Images F&R

Research, 2009). Herein lies a tale of unused retail opportunities in India. Ideally,the

share of food and grocery in organized sector should be close to its share in overall

retail sales. The following points give some more information on the existing situation of

food and grocery category in India.

• The significant share of food-related items in retail sales may account for the large

number of kirana stores in the Indian retail sector (almost 7.5 mn). Over the past few

years, a number of organized players have come up. This segment presents the most

significant potential in the Indian context, as consumer spending is highest on food.

• Apart from the kirana stores, food and grocery is being sold in India through modern

formats like supermarkets, hypermarkets, discount stores and convenience stores.

Table 1, given below, shows the characteristics of food retail formats in India (The

Economic Times Retail, 2003).

• Nielsen’s Shoppers’ Trend Study, 2008 has revealed some changes in consumer

shopping behavior and purchase pattern in the advent of modern trade. Some of the

key insights are as follows (Images F&R Research, 2009):

– Shoppers are shopping at supermarkets more frequently than a year back and the

average basket size per trip is also increasing.

9 | P a g e

– The local grocer /general store, although still supreme, is seeing a steady erosion of

customer base and spends.

– Supermarket shoppers are increasingly shopping at Supermarkets (SM) for fresh

fruits and vegetables with a whopping six times increase in the share of supermarket in

fresh food (among SM shoppers). Correspondingly, the share of local vendor has fallen

by half.

– Wet markets, at present, have managed to retain their customer base.

– The modern format is no longer catering only to the upper socioeconomic groups. The

Socio-Economic Class (SEC) A demographic now comprises less than half of the

customer base with both SEC B and more so, SECC seeing an increase in the

proportion. Given the growing importance of this segment, retailers need to keep in

mind the needs of both their primary and secondary customers while deciding on brand

and SKU stocking.

– The attributes that a customer looks for while selecting a store also are almost

unchanged, with locational convenience still supreme followed by perceived value for

money, range and quality of stocking.

– Indian consumers are rapidly evolving and accepting modern retail formats. By 2011,

India will have an additional 280 hypermarkets, 3,200 supermarkets, 400 department

stores and approximately 1,200 mega specialty stores (the category killers) and 20,000

exclusive

brand outlets.The proliferation of different store formats especially in the urban centres

of our country is not merely an offshoot of our attempt to ape the West. There has been

a conscious shift towards more open, bigger and cleaner formats in the recent past.

However, the typical Indian woman consumer has still not been able to give up the local

Kirana store for her groceries procurement. This study attempts to compare three of the

most popular store formats-the local Kirana store, the local Supermarket and on outlet

of an organized Retail Chain such as D Mart and Big Bazaar-with respect to the drivers

of store format choice.

There is a growing need to evaluate the true drivers of shopping behavior in

the

Indian context. The Indian retailing scenario seems to be driven more by euphoria.

To a large section of customers the new formats are perceived to add insufficient

additional value, except for novelty. The new expansions are adaptations of western

formats fetching moderate to lukewarm success. Several successful chains are

currently

holding back new expansions. Store choice and patronage have been widely studied

across the world. There is still vast scope for research and analysis as the retailing

environment changes rapidly, leading to changed shopper expectations and

realignment

of the choice set of stores. This phenomenon gains greater significance in the Indian

10 | P a g e

market, with the introduction of larger and more diverse retail formats by organized

retailers. It is providing new experiences and options to shop for the consumer.

A variety of formats are being rolled out, with mixed success. Both retailers and

shoppers are currently in an evaluation phase with no clear verdict as to what may

drive the choice of stores in the longer term.

. The underlying issue is—can organized retail in food and

grocery compete with the mom-and-pop stores, which offer the unbeatable advantages

of convenience of access and home delivery (The Economic Times Retail, 2003).

The trademark of Indian retailing, the small kirana shop with a high level of

personalized

service, is making shoppers reluctant to depart from traditional ways of shopping.

Tuli and Mookerjee (2004), in their study of shop patronage behavior of Indian rural

consumers, have also given further direction of research by stating that a study on the

lines of their research could also be conducted on urban consumers’ demographic

profiles. This understanding can be applied to corporate retail format decision.

This study was undertaken to understand the various factors in terms of decision

variables which influence the consumers’ preference and in understanding the criticality

of these factors in choosing between the two major competing formats for food and

grocery category, i.e., traditional (kirana) stores and modern (organized) retailers.

Significantly, it is the consumer’s perceptions of the relative merits of the retail

attributes present in both these formats which are of critical importance to the marketer.

The importance of perceptual attributes goes beyond the physical features of stimuli

since consumers link attributes to benefits of purchasing and consuming. These

benefits

or consequences lead to certain end states or values that consumers wish to achieve

(Aaker et al., 1992; Mowen, 1993; and Belch and Belch, 1995).

SOUTH ASIAN

LITERATURE REVIEW

Mulky (2005) stated that only a small proportion of India’s population owns self

transportation vehicles. Lack of public transport systems, overcrowding and high

commute times, roads that are often choked with traffic, make it difficult for commuters

to travel long distance. The infrastructure of roads and transport is even less-developed

in rural areas. Hence, a large majority of India’s population is compe lled to make most

of their retail purchases, especially of daily necessities from shops located in their

neighbourhood. Traditional retailing has been established in India for some centuries.

It is a low cost structure, mostly owner-operated, has negligible real estate and labor

costs and little or no taxes to pay. Consumer familiarity that runs from generation to

11 | P a g e

generation is one big advantage for the traditional retailing sector. In contrast, players

in the organized sector have big operating expenses to meet, and yet have to keep

prices low enough to be able to compete with the traditional sector. Organized retailing

also has to cope with the middle class psychology that the bigger and brighter sales

outlet is, the more expensive it will be. Organized food retailing is moving towards

modernization and systemization offering quality, standardization, variety of products,

etc., at competitive prices. The cheap prices are a big attraction to the Indian consumer

who is highly price-driven and value conscious.The formats and types of the retail

market are quite varied in India. As per Anand and Nambiar (2003), there is an excellent

food retailing system that has been established by kirana (mom-n-pop) stores that

continue to meet all the retail requirements albeit without the convenience of shopping

as provided by the retail chains. Some of the several co-existing types and formats are

the road side hawkers and the mobile (pushcart variety) retailers: the kirana stores (the

Indian equivalent of the mom-n-pop stores of the US), within which are of two

categories—open format in more organized outlets and small to medium food retail

outlets. SOUTH ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT Volume 18128 No. 1 The

unorganized sector is serviced mostly by the mobile retailers. They can be seen in

every Indian by lane and are therefore, difficult to track, measure and analyze.

Most retailing of fresh foods in India occurs in mandis and roadside hawker

parks, which are usually illegal and entrenched. Semi-organized retailers like kirana

grocers and provision stores are characterized by more systematic buying and selling

from fixed structures. For a long time, the corner grocery store was the only choice

available to the consumer, especially, in urban areas. This is slowly giving way to

international formats of retailing like supermarkets/grocery chains, convenience stores

and fastfood chains. The traditional grocers, by introducing self-service formats as well

as value-added services such as credit and home-delivery, have also tried to redefine

themselves. The Indian customer has always shopped at mandis for fruits, vegetables

and dry grocery and is habituated and comfortable with buying after getting a feel of

the products (Prasuna and Sughanda, 2005). This characteristic of the Indian

consumers has led the organized food retail players to set up separate areas in the

supermarkets catering to fresh produce. Some players also offer value-added services

such as home delivery, sabzi mandi (vegetable market) on phone, etc., thereby,

capturing the ‘Indianness’ in their business.

When comparing the how kirana stores fare with respect to supermarkets,

Guptaet al. (2002) find that retailers who have a strong local touch can better estimate

demand for products and assess profiles of the products that can sell, based on their

familiarity with local tastes, consumer preferences and consumption patterns. Kirana

stores in India seem to fare better than modern retailers on this count. According to

Aggarwal (2000), in India, the kirana shop has the edge over supermarkets for many

reasons. One reason is that Indian housewife is reluctant to go further than the nearest

12 | P a g e

kirana for items of daily use. Home delivery is free and accounts are settled at the

customers’ convenience, interest free. In India the kirana shop has an edge over

supermarkets for several reasons: proximity, service and price (Business Today, 1999).

To be successful in India essentially means to draw away shoppers from the roadside

Hawkers and kirana stores to supermarkets (Anand and Nambiar et al., 2003).

To counter the unbeatable advantage of convenience of a hop, skip and jump access

and home delivery, organized retailers seem to have just one option—offer attractive

prices. Krishnan (2001) has also written that small retail outlets have traditionally

served the markets efficiently, making customers accustomed to getting the products

within easy reach. These small retail outlets are made viable by the low cost of

infrastructure and operations in India. Sinha and Banerjee (2004) found that overall

proximity and merchandize were the primary reasons for shoppers choosing their store.

More than 70% of the respondents indicated these as their strongest reason for

choice.Then came the reasons like ambience (8%) and patronized store (8%). The

authors have said that grocery and fruit and vegetable stores were visited by shoppers

based on more proximity and patronization. The importance of relationship/comfort level

with the retailer is stressed with regard to grocery stores. Shoppers perceive stores in a

FOOD AND GROCERY RETAIL: PATRONAGE BEHAVIOR OF INDIAN

URBAN CONSUMERS Volume 18129No. 1

multidimensional way and that the dimensions vary significantly across the types of

stores frequented. Consumers at grocery/fruit and vegetable stores report the most

diverse set of observations regarding these stores. Their basic premise is that the

drivers of store loyalty (an antecedent of store choice) can be categorized into three

broad

groups—utilitarian dimensions also termed as “Risk Reducers (proximity, quality of

merchandize, personal relationship)”, “Choice Enhancers (convenience, availability

and spread, design-format)”, and “Shopping Experience Enhancers (ambience,

customer

service, entertainment)”. Their study does indicate that new formats are being chosen

based on parameters different from the old format, such as merchandise, ambience

and service.

In a KSA Technopak study presented by Business Today (1999), the reasons why

housewives prefer to purchase grocery from the neighborhood supermarket (modern

retail store) are listed as location convenience (easily approachable on foot), stock of

everything from scrubs and mops to fresh fruits (product variety and assortment),

enough parking facility (in case the customer drives down to the store) and convenient

operating hours. Other variables which affect the retail outlet choice are value-

formoney,

quality of products, polite and courteous salespeople, exchange/returns policy,

non-interfering salespeople, product choice, product width, and product information.

13 | P a g e

Tuli and Mookerjee (2004) studied the patronage behavior of Indian rural

consumers to identify the decision variables influencing the patronage of various retail

formats such as village shops and periodic markets (haats) using Tea as the product.

They concluded that village shops are perceived to be low on shopping activity cost in

comparison to periodic centers, where as periodic markets are perceived to have high

probability of lower prices and high product variety. Rural consumers prefer to meet

their immediate and day-to-day needs from village shops; at the same time bulk

purchases will drive them to the periodic markets.

Given the rapid rate at which new retail formats have been introduced in the

Indian market in recent times, many with limited success, it is imperative for Indian

businesses to understand changing shopping behavior among consumers, especially

with regard to their preferred points of purchase. There is still vast scope for research

and analysis as the retailing environment changes rapidly, leading to changed shopper

expectations and realignment of the choice set of stores. Thus, consumer purchasing

behavior can be termed as patronage behavior of the consumer. From the above given

literature review, the study of the patronage behavior of consumers in food and grocery

category has been identified as a hitherto unexplored area and the research study has

been conducted in this area.

14 | P a g e

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

15 | P a g e

OBJECTIVE To understand the factors which influence the store choice behaviour of

women for household grocery. The two factors included are-

● Consumer profile

● Comparison of store layout

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study began with a review of literature already available as research

papers and articles. The variables identified were as follows:

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES

Age, Marital status, family size, Professional Status, Income and Native

state.

DEPENDANT VARIABLES

Frequency of store visits, average basket size at each format, monthly

grocery spend and preference for different store formats.

Study was conducted in two parts.The two parts are Exploratory and

Descriptive

16 | P a g e

DATA SOURCES

PRIMARY DATA

The primary data was collected from the questionnaire.

The questionnaire was prepared asking 250 respondents about their purchase behavior

towards grocery. The questionnaire was asked to women. The questionnaire is a mixed

bag of open ended and closed ended questions.The questionnaires were filled by the

respondents themselves. The respondent was free to give his opinion on the questions

. An equal number of responses were recorded from women to carry out our research.

SECONDARY DATA

Secondary data was collected from google, newspaper, magazine and

google scholar to do exploratory studies

SAMPLING PLAN

1.SAMPLING UNIT:

Women of all age groups residing in the city of

Mumbai.

2. SAMPLE SIZE:

The sample size taken is 250

3. SAMPLING TECHNIQUE:

The sampling technique carried out is Non probabilistic judgement

sampling.

17 | P a g e

CHAPTER 4

HYPOTHESIS

18 | P a g e

DATA ANALYSIS

Data collected from primary source was analyzed using statistical test such

as:

1. t-test

2. chi-square test

3. p-test

4. Regression

5. ANOVA- one factor

6. ANOVA-two factor

19 | P a g e

H1:- The average age of women who buy grocery from Organised Retail Shop is equal to

30 (Urmila)

N Ha: µ=30 A Ho: µ≠30

T two tail test

T t test A 5%

R 0.05

C 1.96 47.5

O 3.71

P FORMULA X'-µ S/(SQRT(N))

1.96

1.96 3.71

X'-µ 3 N 125 SQRT 11.18 reject the null hypothesis

SD 9.04 S/(SQRT(N)) 0.81

Row Labels

Average of Age

3 33

Grand Total 33

20 | P a g e

H2:- The average age of women who buy grocery from Supermarket is equal to 30. (Ajit)

Row Labels Average of Age

2 31.83

Grand Total

31.83

N 100 X 31.83

S 8.867 U 30 N Ho: = 30 A Ha: ≠ 30

T TWO TAIL TEST

T T TEST

47.5 47.5 A 5%

R 2.50%

2.5 C tC

2.5

O tO 2.063832

-

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

2

Total

Total

21 | P a g e

P

-1.984

1.984

REJECT NULLHYPOTHESIS

H3:- The average age of women who buy grocery from Kirana stores is equal to 30.(Pooja)

22 | P a g e

Row Labels Average of Age

1 33

Grand Total 33

N Ho: μ = 30

A HA: μ ≠ 30

T Two-Tail Test

T T-test

A 5% R 5%

C 47.5

O 3.73 P

formula

3.73

X'-μ 3.73

47.5

(S/(SQRT N))

X' 33

μ 30

S 8.99

N 125

H4:- The average spend per visit to an Organised Retail Shop to purchase grocery is equal to Rs

1500. (shahista)

Row Labels Average of Typical Basket Value

-

10

20

30

40

1

Total

Total

Linear (Total)

800.00

1,000.00

1,200.00

1,400.00

1,600.00

1,800.00

Total

Total

23 | P a g e

N Ha: µ=1500 A Ho: µ≠1500

T two tail test T t test A 5% R 0.05 C

O Zo: 0.54 P

FORMULA

X'-µ 0.54

S/(SQRT(N))

X'-µ 167

N 125 SQRT 11.18 SD 3,468.17 S/(SQRT(N)) 310.20

H5:- The average spend per visit to a Supermarket to purchase grocery is equal to Rs 9000.(Kanchan)

3 1,666.67 Grand Total 1666.666667

2,000.00

4,000.00

6,000.00

8,000.00

10,000.00

Total

Total

24 | P a g e

Row Labels

Average of Total Monthly Spend

2

9,238.10

Grand Total

9,238.10

N Ho: µ=9000

A Ha: µ≠9000

T 2 tailed test T T Test A 5% R 2.50% C 1.984

O 0.51

P

accept the null hypothesis

FORMULA X'-µ S/(SQRT(N)) n 125

X' 9,238.10

47.5

s

5,236.05

0.51

µ 9000 √n

25 | P a g e

11.18

P TEST

H1:- 50% of women who purchase grocery from kirana store feel

home delivery is important

Row Labels Count of Age

n 125

1 1

p 0.50

2 11

p' 0.76

3 16

q 0.50

4 58

5 37

p-p'

(blank) 2

sqrt(pq/n)

Grand Total 125

p-p' -0.26

58+37 95

p' 0.76

pq/n 0.002

0.04

(5.81)

N Ha:p=50%

A Ho:p≠50% T two tail test

T ptest A 5% R 2.5%

+

C 1.96

O (5.81)

P

5.81

reject the null hypothesis

26 | P a g e

H2:- 60% of women purchase grocery from Organized Retail Shop feal

home delivery is important.

Row Labels Count of Home Delivery Service

1 45

2 41

3 3

4 5

5 12

6 1

7 8

8 7

(blank) 1

Grand Total 123


3 3

Grand Total 3

N Ho: P=0.6 N 123

A Ha: P≠0.6 P' 0.02

T Prapotion test P 0.6

T TWO TAIL TEST Q 0.4

A 5%

R 2.5 P'-P

C SQRT(P*Q/N)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Total

Total

27 | P a g e

O (13.03)

P P'-P (0.58)

P*Q/N 0.001951

(P*Q/N) 0.04

47.5 47.5

2.5

2.5

-1.9

1.9

H3:- 40% of women who purchase grocery from Supermarket feel



1 45

28 | P a g e

2 41

3 3

4 5

5 12

6 1

7 8

8 7

(blank) 1

Grand Total 123


2 41

Grand Total 41

05

101520253035404550

Total

Total

29 | P a g e

N ho: n 123 A ha: p' 0.33

T

two tail test p 0.40

q 0.60

T P-test

A 5% p'-p R 2.5% sqrt(pq/n)

p'-p (0.07)

C pq/n 0.04

O 0.04

P

-1.9

1.9

H4:- 45% of women who purchase grocery from Local Market feel



1 45 2 41 3 3 4 5 5 12 6 1 7 8 8 7 (blank) 1

30 | P a g e

Grand Total 123

N Ha:p = 45%

A Ho:p≠ 45%

T two tail test

T ptest

A 5% R 2.5%

C 1.96 O Zo:

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 (blank)

Total

Total

31 | P a g e

(21.14)

P

n 125 p 0.45

p' 0.37

q 0.55

p-p'

sqrt(pq/n)

p'-p -0.08

sqrt(pq/n) 0.004

H5:- 55% of women who purchase grocery from

supermarket feel it is unimportant.

N Ho: P=55% A Ha: P≠55% T 2 tailed test T P Test A 5%

R 2.50%

C 1.96

O 50.39

P

accept the null hypothesis

Formul

a: p'-p sqrt(pq/n) n 125 p 0.55

p' 11.18

q 0.45

-1.96

1.96

32 | P a g e

37+11 48

sqrt(n) 11.18

50.39

sqrt(pq) 0.50

sqrt(pq/n)

0.21

Row Labels

Count of Store Type Usually Preferred

Academic 37 Finance 11 IT 4 Others 1 Sales &

marketing 1 Sales&

marketing 7 Technical 5 Grand

Total 66

H6:- The Proportion of working women purchase grocery from

kirana is 15%.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

TotalTo…

33 | P a g e

Row Labels Average of Store Type Usually Preferred

Entreprene

ur

3.67

Home

Maker

2.57

Service

3.07

Student

2.48

Grand Total 2

.76

N Ho: P=15%

A Ha: P≠15%

T 2 tailed test

T P Test

A 5%

R 2.50%

C 1.96

34 | P a g e

O 30.11

P reject the null hypothesis

n 125

p 0.15

p' 1.11

q 0.85

sqrt(n) 11.18

sqrt(pq) 0.36

ANOVA TEST

URMILA

H1:- There is no variation in age across different store formats

Row Labels Count of Store Type Usually Preferred

18 1

19 3

20 2

21 4

22 8

23 3

24 4

25 8

26 5

27 3

28 12

29 3

30 8

31 3

32 6

33 1

34 1

35 | P a g e

35 8

36 5

38 2

39 3

40 4

41 1

42 2

43 3

44 1

45 6

46 1

47 1

48 5

50 2

51 1

52 3

Grand Total 123

Anova: Single Factor

SUMMARY

Groups

Count Sum

Average

Variance

Column 1

33.00

1,139.00

34.52

105.07

Column 2

33.00

123.00

3.73

7.27

ANOVA

Source of Variation SS df MS F

P-value F crit

alpha

Between Groups

15,64

1.00

15,64

278.

0.00

3.99

0.05

36 | P a g e

0.24 0.24 45

Within Groups

3,594.79

64.00

56.17

Total

19,235.03

65.00

reject the hypothesis

AJIT

H2: There is no variation in the average Typical Basket value

of women across different store formats Row Labels


70 1

100 1

120 1

200 3

250 1

300 4

350 1

400 1

450 1

500 5

550 1

700 2

800 1

1000 8

1500 6

1800 1

2000 15

2500 2

3000 12

3500 2

3800 1

4000 6

4500 8

37 | P a g e

5000 12

5200 1

5500 5

7000 3

7500 1

8000 2

9000 2

10000 7

11000 2

12000 1

15000 1

18000 1

(blank) 1

Grand Total 123 Anova: Single Factor

SUMMARY

Groups Count Sum Average

Variance

70.00

34.00

145,520.00

4,280.00

21,659,963.64

1.00

34.00

121.00

3.56

13.77

ANOVA


P-value

F crit

Between Groups

310,895,135.31

1.00

310,895,135.31

28.71

0.00

3.99

Within Groups

714,779,254.38

66.00

10,829,988.70

Total

1,025,674,389.69

67.00

38 | P a g e

Reject the Null

POOJA

H3: There is no variation in family size across the

different store format.


2 5

3 17

4 38

5 31

6 14

7 2

8 9

9 1

10 2

11 1

15 1

24 1

29 1

Grand Total 123


SUMMARY

Groups

Count

Sum

Average

Variance

0

5

10

15

20

Total

Total

39 | P a g e

2.00 12.00

131.00

10.92 64.81

5.00

12.00

118.00

9.83

165.79

ANOVA


P-value

F crit

alpha

Between Groups

7.04

1.00

7.04

0.06

0.81

4.30

0.05

reject null

Within Groups

2,536.58

22.00

115.30

Total

2,543.63

23.00

REJECT THE HYPOTHESIS

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 15 24 29

Total

Total

40 | P a g e

SHAHISTA

H4:There is no variation in the average age of women and

quick services.

Row Labels Count of Quick Service

18 1

19 3

20 2

21 4

22 8

23 3

24 4

25 8

26 5

27 3

28 12

29 3

30 8

31 3

32 5

33 1

34 1

35 8

36 5

38 2

39 3

40 4

41 1

42 3

43 3

44 1

45 6

46 1

47 1

41 | P a g e

48 5

50 2

51 1

52 3

(blank)

Grand Total 123


SUMMARY

Groups

Count

Sum

Average

Variance

Column 1

33.00

1,139.00

34.52

105.07

Column 2

33.00

123.00

3.73

7.08

ANOVA


P-value

F crit

Alpha

Between PLA

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Total

Total

42 | P a g e

Groups 15,640.24

1.00 15,640.24

278.92

0.00

3.99

0.05

TR

Within Groups

3,588.79

64.00

56.07

Total

19,229.03

65.00

Reject the null

KANCHAN

H5: There is no variation in average monthly spend across

different store formats. Row Labels

Average of Total Monthly Spend

1 8,261.36

2 9,238.10

3 6,333.33

4 8,600.00

5 15,000.00

6 2,500.00

7 8,250.00

8 5,428.57

Grand Tot

9,016.39

43 | P a g e

al


SUMMARY

Groups Count

Sum

Average

Variance

Row Labels 8 36 4.5 6

Average of Total Monthly Spend 8

63611.364

7951.42

12949262

ANOVA


P-value

F crit

alpha

Between Groups

252614179 1

2.53E+08

39.01598

0.00

4.60

0.05

PLTA

R

Reject the null

hypothesis

Within Groups

90644876 14

6474634

Total

343259055 15

Reject the Null

H0: μ1 = μ2 = μ3 = μ4 = μ5 = μ6 =

μ7

= μ8

Ha: μ1 ≠ μ2 ≠ μ3 ≠ μ4 ≠ μ5 ≠ μ6 ≠ μ7 ≠ μ8

N = 8

C = 2

44 | P a g e

JAGDISH KA GOOGLE DOC ME ALREADY HAI OK…….

RAGHU

H7:- There is no variation in the average family size across different store formats.


2 5

3 17

4 38

5 31

6 14

7 2

8 9

9 1

10 2

11 1

15 1

24 1

-

2,000.00

4,000.00

6,000.00

8,000.00

10,000.00

12,000.00

14,000.00

16,000.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Total

Total

45 | P a g e

29 1

Grand Total 123


46 | P a g e

SUMMARY

Groups Count Sum

Average

Variance

Row Labels 13.00

133.00

10.23

65.53


13.00

123.00

9.46

153.77

ANOVA


P-value

F crit

alpha

Between Groups

3.85

1.00

3.85

0.04

0.85

4.26

0.05

PLTAR

Within Groups

2,631.54

24.00

109.65

Total

2,635.38

25.00

H0: μ1 = μ2

= μ3 = μ4 = μ5 = μ6

= μ7 = μ8 =

Ha: μ1 ≠ μ2

≠ μ3 ≠ μ4 ≠ μ5 ≠ μ6 ≠ μ7 ≠ μ8 ≠

N = 12

C = 2

47 | P a g e

CHI SQUARE TESTS

URMILA

H1:- The choice of the store is dependent on proximity. The women who feel

proximity is important the standard deviation is estimated to be 50


4 60

5 48 Grand Total 108

var 72.00

N Ha:σ2=50

A Ho:σ2≠50

T two tail test

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 15 24 29

Total

Total

48 | P a g e

T chi squaretest

A 5%

R 0.025

C 129.5,77.95

X2df,alph

a

X2107,0.025

O 154.08

P X2107,0.95

formula (n-1)*s2

σ2

7,704.00

154.08

18.16

77.95

129.5 154.08

reject the null hypothesis

AJIT

49 | P a g e

H2:- The choice of the store is independent on age is estimated to be 35.


18 1

19 3

20 2

21 4

22 8

23 3

24 4

25 8

26 5

27 3

28 12

29 3

30 8

31 3

32 6

33 1

34 1

35 8

36 5

38 2

39 3

40 4

41 1

42 2

43 3

44 1

45 6

46 1

47 1

48 5

50 2

51 1

52 3

(blank)

Grand Total 123

N Ho: σ2=35 N 123 DF=122

50 | P a g e

A Ha: σ2≠36 S2 8.991

T Proportion test SIGMA 35

T TWO TAIL TEST

A 5% (N-1)*S2

R 2.5 σ2

C

O 31.34

31.34

P

31.34

77.92

124.3221

ACCEPT THE HYPOTHESIS

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Total

Total

51 | P a g e

POOJA

H3:- The choice of the store is dependent on Income >3lakh


<3 Lakhs 24

>20 Lakhs 4

10 - 15 Lakhs 1

15- 20 Lakhs 1

3 - 5 Lakhs 1

5-10 Lakhs 24

Grand Total 55

stdev 11.55

N HO: σ2 = 300,000

A HA: σ2 ≠ > 300,000

T TWO TAIL TEST

T CHI SQUARE TEST

A 5%

R 0.025

C 11.0705 X2 (DF, ALPHA) (54,0.025)

O 0.002079 X2 (DF, ALPHA) (54,0.95)

P

FORMULA

(n-1)* s2

σ2

623.62

0.002079

52 | P a g e

0.00

1.63538

11.07

reject the null

SHAHISTA H4:- The choice of the store is dependent on store choice

and urgency of purchase.

Values

Row Labels Sum of Urgency Of Purchase

Sum of Store Image

1 144 161

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

<3 Lakhs >20 Lakhs 10 - 15

Lakhs

15- 20

Lakhs

3 - 5 Lakhs 5-10 Lakhs

Total

Total

53 | P a g e

2 135 149

3 9 12

4 15 13

5 37 37

6 1 5

7 24 28

8 24 24

Grand Total 389 429

Observed Frequency

ROW LABELS

VALUES SUM OF URGENCY OF PURCHASE

Sum of Store Image

1 144 161 305 37%

2 135 149 284 34%

3 9 12 21 3%

4 15 13 28 3%

5 37 37 74 9%

6 1 5 6 1%

7 24 28 52 6%

8 24 24 48 6%

Grand Total 389 429

Expected Frequency

Values

Row Labels Sum of Urgency Of Purchase Sum of Store Image

1 144

158

2 135

148

3 10

11

4 13

15

5 35

38

6 3

3

7 25

27

8 23

25

54 | P a g e

∑(fo-fe)^2/fe

Values

Row Labels Sum of Urgency Of Purchase Sum of Store Image

1 0.00

0.04

2 0.00

0.02

3 0.10

0.11

4 0.21

0.16

5 0.09

0.05

6 1.21

1.14

7 0.02

0.04

8 0.06

0.03

N H0: Types of store choice is dependent on the availability of the Store image and Urgency of Purchase.

A

Ha: Types of store choice is not dependent on the availability of the store image and Urgency of Purchase.

T Chi-squared

T

right-tail

A acceptance region 95%

alph

a 5%

R rejection region 5%

C =chiinv(alpha, df)

df = (C-1)*(r-1)

O (Fo-Fe)^2/Fe

55 | P a g e

P =chitest(observed array, expected array)

PGTA

P VALUE

0.92

OBSERVED

11.24

CRITICAL

14.07

ACCEPT NULL

KANCHAN

H5:- The choice of the store is dependent on Family

Composition is estimated to be 5


5 31

6 14

7 2

8 9

9 1

10 2

Grand Total 59

SD 11.55

0

50

100

150

200

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Sum of Urgency Of Purchase

Sum of Store Image

56 | P a g e

N Ha:σ2=5

A Ho:σ2≠5

T right tail test

T chi squaretest

A 5%

R 0.025

C 83.2977,43.18797

O 133.98


X258,0.025

X258,0.95

n 59

s^2 11.55

σ^2 5

formula = (n-1)*s2

σ2

43.18797

83.2977

-2.31

JAGDISH

H6: The choice of store is dependent on store image is estimated to be 50.

57 | P a g e

Row Labels Count of Proximity

1 45

2 41

3 3

4 5

5 12

6 1

7 8

8 7

Grand Total 122

SD 17.47

N Ha:σ2=50

A Ho:σ2≠50

T two tail test

T chi square test

A 5%

R 0.025

C 83.2977,43.18797

O 42.29


X2 121,0.025

X2 121,0.95

n 122

s^2 17.47

σ^

2

50

58 | P a g e

RAGHU

H7: The choice of store is dependent on parking space is estimated to be 30.

Row Labels Count of Parking Space

1 45

2 41

3 3

4 5

5 12

6 1

7 8

8 7

Grand Total 122

SD 17.47

N Ha:σ2=30

A Ho:σ2≠30

T two tail test

59 | P a g e

T chi square test

A 5%

R 0.025

C 83.2977,43.18797

O 70.48


X2,121,0.025

X2,121,0.95

n 122

s^2 17.47

σ^2 30

Formula = (n-1)*s2

σ2

0

10

20

30

40

50

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Total

Total

60 | P a g e

43.18797

83.2977

70.48

61 | P a g e

62 | P a g e

63 | P a g e

PROPOSED HYPOTHESIS

T TEST

H1:- The average age of women who buy grocery from Organized Retail Shop is equal

to 25 .

H2:- The average age of women who buy grocery from Supermarket is equal to 30.

H3:- The average age of women who buy grocery from Kirana stores is equal to 30.

H4:- The average spend per visit to an Organized Retail Shop to purchase grocery is

equal to Rs 500.

H5:- The average spend per visit to a Supermarket to purchase grocery is equal to Rs

500.

H6:- The average age of women who buy grocery from Mall is equal to 35.

H7: The average income of women who buy grocery from Organized Retail Shop is

more than RS. 30,000

H8:The average income of women who buy grocery from Kirana is less than RS. 30,000

P-TEST

64 | P a g e

H1:- 50% of women who purchase grocery from kirana store feel home delivery is

important

H2:- 60% of women purchase grocery from Organized Retail Shop feel home delivery is

important.

H3:- 40% of women who purchase grocery from Supermarket feel home delivery is

important.

H4:- 45% of women who purchase grocery from Local Market feel home delivery is

important.

H5:- 55% of women who purchase grocery from supermarket feel it is unimportant.

H6:- The Proportion of working women purchase grocery from kirana is 15%.

H7: The Proportion of women purchase grocery from Organized Retail Shop due to

discounts is 40%

H8:The Proportion of women purchase grocery from supermarket due to discounts is

45%.

CHI SQUARE TEST

H1:- The choice of the store is dependent on proximity is estimated to be 50.

H2:- The choice of the store is independent on age is estimated to be 35.

H3:- The choice of the store is dependent on Income.

H4:- The choice of the store is dependent on Ambience.

H5:- The choice of the store is dependent on Family Composition is estimated to be 5.

H6: The choice of store is dependent on promotion.

H7: The choice of store is dependent on discount.

H8: The choice of store is dependent on home delivery

ANOVA

H1: There is no variation in the average age of women across different

store formats

H2: There is no variation in the average Typical Basket value of women

across different store formats.

65 | P a g e

H4:There is no variation in the average age of women and average income

across the store formats

H5: There is no variation in average monthly spend across different store

formats.

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS

66 | P a g e

67 | P a g e

68 | P a g e

rm grocery final

Data & Analytics

purchase of jeans

jeans manufacturers

parameters customers

average age of customers

purchase decision

purchase of grocery

research project

independent of age group