services marketing_project report_group 6

7/29/2019 Services Marketing_Project Report_Group 6

1/20

Franchise in RestaurantsComparative Study of McDonalds Franchises

Group - 6

Biswajit Mishra (P122056)Karthikeyan Annamalai (P122018)

Sriram K Thwar (P122045)

Vidit Jain (P122051)


2/20

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ................................................................................................... 2

INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 3

LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................................. 4

THE INDIAN FAST FOOD MARKET - AN OVERVIEW .............................................. 4

COMPARISON STUDY .............................................................................................. 5

McDONALDS ...................................................................................................... 5

NIRULAS .............................................................................................................. 6

WIMPYS ............................................................................................................... 6

ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................. 6

METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................... 7

SERVQUAL .......................................................................................................... 7

ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................... 9

RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................ 17

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ........................................................................... 19

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 19

Group - 2 Page 2


3/20

INTRODUCTION

The restaurant industry is a demanding sector that stresses the provision ofhigh-level customer service and continuous quality improvement. As lifestyles

change and dining out becomes more and more commonplace, customers desire

new flavours, comfortable ambience and pleasant memories. What is more, they

prefer an excellent overall dining experience. Dining experience is comprised of

both tangible and intangible elements. While tangible elements can easily be

improved, the intangible part of restaurant service requires considerable

attention. Researchers have noted that the ability to deliver high quality service

will provide long-term financial viability and sustainable business success.

Hence, restaurants that provide customers with quality services can gain a

stronger competitive position in todays dynamic marketplaceTraditionally over the ages, fast food for the average Indian customer

meant having breads i.e., paranthas, rotis etc. with sabzi or achaar. These

were the traditionally available snacks or in the form of samosas etc. All

the items were available at the roadside dhabas or the local sweet shops.

There were no established eating places or restaurants for the average

Indian customer.

It was the Nirulas family way back in 1920s that started the trend of

opening good eating places in the city. Nirulas initially when they entered

the restaurant business were more into catering and hotel business. It wasonly in the late 50s and early 60s that they decided to open up a

restaurant serving snacks and fast food. By 70s they had a pastry shop,

snack place and Hot Shoppe. This started the trend of eating joints in the

city and over the country. Nirulas was considered to be the pioneer in fast

food business. Seeing its success in the country other local fast food joints

and restaurant started coming up in the 80s. With the coming up of these

local joints Nirulas was not left behind. It had a well-established fast food

chain over the next decade. However seeing the potential in the country

in the 90s due to the changing life styles, the established chains worldover made their entry into the Indian food market. However the tastes

and the style of the kind of food which these MNCs we offering the Indian

customer has been made familiar to him by Nirulas only.

Although the concept was introduced to the Indians way back, but in the

true sense market for fast food has been developed only after the entry

the various MNCs starting with Wimpys to McDonalds, Pizza Hut, TGIF,

Dominos etc., with many more to come over the next few years.

Group - 2 Page 3


4/20

LITERATURE REVIEW

THE INDIAN FAST FOOD MARKET - AN OVERVIEW

Up to the year 1995 Indian food market was predominantly dominated by

the traditional dhabas, potential restaurants in the customers colony andsome restaurants in a five star hotel. Having fast food i.e., burgers, pizzas

etc., was considered to be an option for eating out. It was not at all

synonymous with the American concept of fast food as a quick takeaway

bite or a substitute for lunch.

Apart from fast food being available at the local colony restaurants and at

some five star restaurants, Nirulas was the only fast food chain existing in

the country with its restaurants expanding with every passing year since

its inception. It has been almost 50 years now since its set up and there is

hardly anyone who doesnt know that Nirulas exists. Nirulas was the firstone to bring fast food to India back in the 50s since then it has evolved

into an eating place with tremendous brand equity and brand recognition.

It proved to be a perfect eating place for an average middle class who

wants to eat out at an affordable price that cant afford the five-star

restaurants and would not want to go to the local dhabas.

Nirulas almost had a monopoly for decades due to the way it has been

placed. It is a place where a person from an average middle class group to

upper class group can go to eat out. Its popularity has increased over the

decades. With the trends changing and the incomes rising almost anybodywho can afford to eat out could go for a snack at Nirulas.

However the year 1995-96 witnessed a drastic change. 1996 is considered

to be the year of Indias entry into the world food market. International

giants such as McDonalds, KFC, TGIF, Dominos and Pizza Hut all

bombarded the Indian food market.

Before these, UK-based joint called Wimpys had established its chain in

the country in 1990. By year 1996 it had about three to four joints

established in Delhi. However it did not pose much of a threat to Nirulas

reason being lack of variety and that Wimpys was looked at more of a

hangout place rather than eating out with the family.

Its been the American international giants i.e., McDonalds, Pizza Hut etc.,

who have targeted their restaurants to the families. Apart from the foreign

and Indian fast food chains setting up shop, there are a range of specialty

restaurants offering varied fare such as Chinese, Mexican, French, Italian

etc. These places however offer range of items different from burgers,

pizzas etc, but they definitely are competition to both foreign and Indian

fast food chains.

Group - 2 Page 4


5/20

However, restaurant business is such which is surrounded by threat from

everywhere be it Indian joints or foreign joints.

It is only these international joints and specialty restaurants which are

gradually coming up and some Indian restaurants which have made up

the food market. Prior to this it was only the local restaurant that becamevisible while passing by or through local banners etc., and the five star

restaurants were for the elite class out of reach by the average middle

class customer. There was hardly any awareness or promotion to beat

competition.

Each of the foreign food joints that have come into the country has their

own strategy lined up to differ from the rest. Each of these studied the

Indian tastes and style and thereby targeted the Indian customer. An

average Indian restaurant goer is no convenience eater, unlike the

Americans.If he is paying, he is paying for food that tastes good (Spicy, soft, savoury

etc.), not for how pleasantly the stuff is served or how spotless the widows

are. He wants food for that can make him come back to the restaurant. An

Indian food joint owner would definitely understand this but an American

company, which comes and places it directly without knowing the

customer is definitely in for trouble. Customer loyalty in a restaurant

business is essentially low. A customer when he comes to a restaurant

usually looks at the quality of food, variety, ambience, speed of delivery

and the location. The variety would influence the frequency of visits sincetaste is a dominating factor to the Indian customers.

Almost all the fast food chains both Indian i.e., Nirulas and foreign i.e.,

McDonalds etc., are targeting the families. This serves to be an advantage

because the turnaround time is short and family has higher propensity to

spend because different members order larger variety of dishes.

Each of these restaurants delivers quality, value and services in its own

way through its line of strategies. The emphasis is on the value that the

restaurant is delivering to the customers.

COMPARISON STUDY

McDONALDS

McDonalds serves its customers with high quality products. There

are extensive quality tests at the supplier and all products are

examined again in the restaurant to ensure that they are of highest

quality possible.

McDonalds provides fast, friendly service. Any customer visitingMcDonalds is usually served within 60 seconds.

Group - 2 Page 5


6/20

McDonalds menu is priced in such a way that the largest segment

of Indian consumers can afford. It has a wide variety of products at

different prices to be affordable to as many as possible.

McDonalds has limited range of items in its menu. However, to get

an item included in the menu approval has to be made from thehigh tech kitchens at McDonalds headquarters in suburban

Chicago.

NIRULAS

The consumer has a wide variety of items to choose from at Nirulas

(Both Indian and Western). These items are constantly modified

keeping the consumer preferences in mind.

Nirulas brand loyalty has not changed (at least till now) despite the

coming in of the MNCs.

Home delivery services started by the restaurant have improved its

customer base. This would prove to be an added advantage in the

long run.

The restaurant does not provide with fast and friendly service. At

times it takes about 30 min for a meal to be served.

WIMPYS

Wimpys serves its customers with a wide variety of items. Theconsumer has a list of items to choose from the menu.

The crewmembers at the restaurant are friendly and meals are

served in about 5 to 7 minutes from the time of its order. At certain

restaurants meals are even served immediately after the order is

placed.

The restaurant is a clean and spacious enough to have a

comfortable meal.

Does not adhere to strict service standards at all its restaurants in a

similar way. If a meal is provided at one restaurant in 60-90 seconds,

it should be provided at the second restaurant in the same time limit.

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to determine restaurant service quality.

The aims are to:

(a) Assess customers expectations and perceptions &

(b) Establish the significance of difference between perceived and expected

service quality.

Group - 2 Page 6


7/20

The results of this study would help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of

service quality and implement an effective strategy to meet the customers

expectations.

METHODOLOGY

SERVQUAL

Our study comprised comparison of services provided by three differentFranchises of McDonalds restaurant located in Gurgaon.

SERVQUAL is the most popular instrument to ascertain service quality. The

research presented in this paper intends to discuss the applicability of

SERVQUAL to restaurant services and to analyze the inclusion of customer

expectations in such environment.

The SERVQUAL instrument contains two sections. One section consists of 22

items that measure consumers expectations. The other section includes 22

corresponding items that measure consumers perceptions of the service they

received. The 22 statements represent the five service dimensions that

consumers use to evaluate service quality: tangibles, reliability, responsiveness,

assurance and empathy.

SERVQUAL is measured on 5 aspects of service quality:

Tangibility:

The appearance of the physical facilities, equipment,

communication material and personnel

Reliability :

The ability to perform a promised service dependably and

accurately

Responsiveness:

The willingness to help customers and to provide prompt services

Assurance:

The knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to

inspire trust and confidence in customers

Empathy:

The caring individualized attention a firm provides its customers

The SERVQUAL instrument itself is discussed, and a demonstration of how

it can be used by restaurants in assessing quality service is included. Themanagerial implications of using SERVQUAL as an assessment tool include

Group - 2 Page 7


8/20

meeting and managing customer expectations, managing the physical

design of the product, educating service customers, developing a total

quality management program, achieving continuous quality through

automation, and engaging in periodic review of the procedures, personnel,

and property of the operation. With the assessment knowledge generatedby such a review, restaurants may then begin to manage their strengths

and weaknesses productively.

SERVQUAL has its detractors and is considered overly complex, subjective

and statistically unreliable. The simplified RATER model however is a

simple and useful model for qualitatively exploring and assessing

customers' service experiences and has been used widely by service

delivery organizations. It is an efficient model in helping an organization

shape up their efforts in bridging the gap between perceived and

expected service.

Group - 2 Page 8


9/20

ANALYSIS

The comparative analysis based on the RATER for the 3 franchises is as

follows:

McDonalds 1:

Expectation Perception GapScore

(E) (P) (P-E)Tangibility

The restaurants should

have latest equipment

5.2 The restaurants have

latest equipment

5.6 0.4

The restaurantsphysical facilities(shelves, counters,computers, lights,tables, etc.) should beattractive

5.5 The restaurantsphysical facilities(shelves, counters,computers, lights,tables, etc.) areattractive

5.4 -0.1

Their employees shouldbe well dressed andtrimmed

5.8 Their employees arewell dressed andtrimmed

5.2 -0.6

The appearance of

physical facilities ofthese restaurantsshould be clean

5.8 The appearance of

physical facilities ofthese restaurants areclean

5.2 -0.6

Average Tangibility SERVQUAL Score -0.225Reliability

When these restaurantspromise to dosomething within acertain time, theyshould do so

5.6 When these restaurantspromise to do somethingwithin a certain time,they do so

5.1 -0.5

When customers haveproblems, these

restaurants shouldshow sincere interest insolving it

6 When customers haveproblems, these

restaurants showsincere interest insolving it

4.9 -1.1

These restaurantsshould be dependable

5.2 These restaurants aredependable

4.6 -0.6

They should providetheir services at thetime they promise to doso

5.7 They provide theirservices at the time theypromise to do so

5.3 -0.4

They should keep theirrecords accurately

5.2 They keep their recordsaccurately

4.3 -0.9

Average Reliability SERVQUAL Score -0.7Responsiveness

Group - 2 Page 9


10/20

Employees of theserestaurants should notbe expected to tellcustomers exactlywhen services will be

performed

5.9 Employees of theserestaurants are notexpected to tellcustomers exactly whenservices will be

performed

5.5 -0.4

Employees should giveprompt service tocustomers

6 Employees give promptservice to customers

5.8 -0.2

Employees always haveto be willing to helpcustomers

4.6 Employees are alwayswilling to help customers

4.1 -0.5

Even if the employeesare busy they should bewilling to respond tocustomer requestspromptly

4.6 Even if the employeesare busy they are willingto respond to customerrequests promptly

4.8 0.2

Average Responsiveness SERVQUAL Score -0.225Assurance

The behaviour ofemployees in therestaurants should instilconfidence incustomers

5.1 The behaviour ofemployees in therestaurants instilsconfidence in customers

5.2 0.1

Customers should beable to feel safe in theirtransactions with theserestaurants employees

5.6 Customers are able tofeel safe in theirtransactions with theserestaurants employees

5 -0.6

Their employees shouldbe polite 5.7 Their employees arepolite 5.6 -0.1

Their employees shouldget adequate supportfrom the restaurants todo their jobs well

5.5 Their employees getadequate support fromthe restaurants to dotheir jobs well

4.7 -0.8

Average Assurance SERVQUAL Score -0.35Empathy

These restaurantsshould not be expectedto give customersindividual attention

4.11 These restaurants arenot expected to givecustomers individualattention

4 -0.11

Employees of theserestaurants cannot beexpected to givecustomers personalattention

4.33 Employees of theserestaurants are notexpected to givecustomers personalattention

4.56 0.23

The employees shouldnot know the specificsof their customers

4.5 The employees dontknow the specifics oftheir customers

3.4 -0.9

These restaurantsshould not have theircustomers best

interests at heart

4.5 These restaurants donthave their customersbest interests at heart

3.7 -0.8

They shouldnt be 5.2 They dont to have 4.6 -0.6

Group - 2 Page 10


11/20

expected to haveoperating hoursconvenient to all theircustomers

operating hoursconvenient to all theircustomers

Average Empathy SERVQUAL Score -0.436

Note: The survey questions 18 to 22 are reverse coded for carrying out the

analysis.

From the above gap score table, it is clearly evident that the average

Reliability SERVQUAL score is the highest. This shows that McDonalds in

MGF Metropolitan Mall lacks in reliability. It means that this franchise fails

to develop reliability. Customers feel that this franchise is not dependable

as the service is not delivered on time. They also have the feeling that this

franchise does not focus on customer issues and their concerns.

McDonalds 2:



The restaurants shouldhave latest equipment

5.6 The restaurants havelatest equipment

5.4 -0.2

The restaurantsphysical facilities(shelves, counters,computers, lights,tables, etc.) should beattractive

5.5 The restaurantsphysical facilities(shelves, counters,computers, lights,tables, etc.) areattractive

5.4 -0.1



5.4 -0.7

The appearance ofphysical facilities ofthese restaurants

should be clean

5.9 The appearance ofphysical facilities ofthese restaurants are

clean

5.4 -0.5




5.1 -0.4

When customers haveproblems, theserestaurants shouldshow sincere interest insolving it

6.3 When customers haveproblems, theserestaurants showsincere interest insolving it

5.2 -1.1

These restaurants 4.6 These restaurants are 4.6 0

Group - 2 Page 11


12/20

should be dependable dependableThey should providetheir services at thetime they promise to doso


4.7 -0.9

They should keep theirrecords accurately 5.2 They keep their recordsaccurately 4.2 -1


Employees of theserestaurants should notbe expected to tellcustomers exactlywhen services will beperformed

5.8 Employees of theserestaurants are notexpected to tellcustomers exactly whenservices will beperformed

4.7 -1.1

Employees should giveprompt service to

customers

6 Employees give promptservice to customers

4.9 -1.1


4.1 Employees are alwayswilling to help customers

3.3 -0.8



4.1 -0.1

Average Responsiveness SERVQUAL Score -0.775

Group - 2 Page 12


13/20

AssuranceThe behaviour ofemployees in the

restaurants should instilconfidence incustomers

4.8 The behaviour ofemployees in the

restaurants instilsconfidence in customers

4.6 -0.2



5.3 -0.1

Their employees shouldbe polite

5.6 Their employees arepolite

5.8 0.2

Their employees shouldget adequate supportfrom the restaurants to

do their jobs well

6.2 Their employees getadequate support fromthe restaurants to do

their jobs well

4.6 -1.6




2.5 -1.1

Employees of theserestaurants cannot beexpected to givecustomers personal

attention

3.3 Employees of theserestaurants are notexpected to givecustomers personal

attention

2.7 -0.6


4 The employees dontknow the specifics oftheir customers

2.7 -1.3

These restaurantsshould not have theircustomers bestinterests at heart

4 These restaurants donthave their customersbest interests at heart

2.7 -1.3

They shouldnt beexpected to haveoperating hoursconvenient to all their

customers

4.6 They dont to haveoperating hoursconvenient to all theircustomers

4.5 -0.1



analysis.

The above table shows that McDonalds franchise-2 has the highest gap

score in empathy. This is majorly because of its customers opinion that

this franchise is not empathetic enough in treating them. Customers feel

that the employees are not treating them properly.

Group - 2 Page 13


14/20

McDonalds 3:



The restaurants shouldhave latest equipment

6.1 The restaurants havelatest equipment

5.4 -0.7

The restaurantsphysical facilities

(shelves, counters,computers, lights,tables, etc.) should beattractive

5.8 The restaurantsphysical facilities

(shelves, counters,computers, lights,tables, etc.) areattractive

5.3 -0.5



5.9 0.2

The appearance ofphysical facilities ofthese restaurantsshould be clean

5.6 The appearance ofphysical facilities ofthese restaurants areclean

5.5 -0.1




5.2 -0.5

When customers haveproblems, theserestaurants shouldshow sincere interest insolving it

5.9 When customers haveproblems, theserestaurants showsincere interest insolving it

5.3 -0.6

These restaurantsshould be dependable

5.7 These restaurants aredependable

4.8 -0.9

They should providetheir services at thetime they promise to doso


5 -0.6

They should keep theirrecords accurately

5.4 They keep their recordsaccurately

4.3 -1.1


Employees of theserestaurants should notbe expected to tellcustomers exactly

5.5 Employees of theserestaurants are notexpected to tellcustomers exactly when

4.7 -0.8

Group - 2 Page 14


15/20

when services will beperformed

services will beperformed

Employees should giveprompt service tocustomers

5.7 Employees give promptservice to customers

5.2 -0.5


3.8 Employees are alwayswilling to help customers 3 -0.8



5.3 0.2

Average Responsiveness SERVQUAL Score -0.475

Group - 2 Page 15


16/20

AssuranceThe behaviour ofemployees in the

restaurants should instilconfidence incustomers

5.6 The behaviour ofemployees in the

restaurants instilsconfidence in customers

4.8 -0.8



4.9 -0.6

Their employees shouldbe polite

5.7 Their employees arepolite

6.1 0.4

Their employees shouldget adequate supportfrom the restaurants to

do their jobs well

5.7 Their employees getadequate support fromthe restaurants to do

their jobs well

5.2 -0.5




3.1 -0.8

Employees of theserestaurants cannot beexpected to givecustomers personal

attention

4.3 Employees of theserestaurants are notexpected to givecustomers personal

attention

3.2 -1.1


4.2 The employees dontknow the specifics oftheir customers

3.1 -1.1

These restaurantsshould not have theircustomers bestinterests at heart

4 These restaurants donthave their customersbest interests at heart

3 -1

They shouldnt beexpected to haveoperating hoursconvenient to all their

customers

5.6 They dont to haveoperating hoursconvenient to all theircustomers

5.3 -0.3



analysis.

The above gap score table shows that this franchise also fails in showing

empathy like the franchise 2. The employees of this franchise are not

showing much interest on customer convenience.

Group - 2 Page 16


17/20

RECOMMENDATIONS

From the above analysis, the unweighted SERVQUAL score table of three

franchises has been arrived as follows:

Franchise 1:

Unweighted SERVQUAL Score Table

Average Tangible SERVQUAL Score -0.225

Average Reliability SERVQUAL Score -0.7

Average Responsiveness SERVQUALScore

-0.225

Average Assurance SERVQUAL Score -0.35


Total -1.936

Average Unweighted SERVQUALScore

-0.387

From the above table, it can be inferred that there is a big gap between

the customers perception and exception in terms of reliability and tosome extent sympathy. Apart from that, this franchise has done well to

meet the customer satisfaction levels.

The recommendations for the franchise to improve its score are as

follows:

Employees of this franchise should express interest to solve

customer issues, their concerns and also be proactive instead of

being reactive.

Employee training about better customer service also has to be

done. The franchise can make their customers know that, whatever takes

place or has been agreed upon, they can be sure that their best

interests are kept at heart.

Franchise 2:


Average Tangible SERVQUAL Score -0.375Average Reliability SERVQUAL Score -0.68

Group - 2 Page 17


18/20

Average Responsiveness SERVQUALScore

-0.775



Total -3.135Average Unweighted SERVQUAL

Score-0.627

The above table shows that this franchise is facing problems in meeting

customer expectation in three of the five factors with empathy having the

largest gap. The overall gap is the highest because of the work force as

most of them are newly joined. By implementing the following

recommendations, this franchise can narrow down the service quality gap.

The attrition rate should be taken care of as it is the highest when

compared to other franchises.

The franchise should train their employees to treat the customers

with empathy.

The employees should be concerned about the customers and

should be interested not just in solving their problems but solving

them in a friendly and spontaneous way.

Though developing a better bonding with the customers is difficult

in these types of restaurants, even showing that intent would please

the customers.

Franchise 3:


Average Tangible SERVQUAL Score -0.275

Average Reliability SERVQUAL Score -0.74

Average Responsiveness SERVQUAL

Score -0.475



Total -2.725

Average Unweighted SERVQUALScore

-0.545

From the above gap score table, it can be concluded that this franchise

lacks in developing reliability and showing empathy to its customers.

It is recommended that

Group - 2 Page 18


19/20

The franchise has to take steps to increase the reliability by training

the employees of customer value and importance of delivering

promised service

The franchise should train their employees to treat the customers

with empathy

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Thus, the SERVQUAL scale provides important insights about how well

actual service performance meets customers expectations. Hence, it is

justified to employ this scale modified for McDonalds restaurants to see

whether delivered service meets, exceeds or falls below customers

expectations.

From the gap score table, it is clearly evident that all the Franchises under

study have gaps in dimensions namely empathy and reliability, major

reason for this being the working model of McDonalds. Anyways, these

gaps could be minimised by implementing the above recommendations.

REFERENCES

Services Marketing, Integrating Customer Focus Across the Firm

5th Edition, Mary Jo Bitner , Valarie A. Zeithaml, Dwayne D Gremler, Ajay

Pandit

Links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SERVQUAL

http://indiafoodfranchise.blogspot.in/2011/12/mcdonalds-franchise-set-to-

grow-focus.html

http://www.mbaknol.com/management-case-studies/case-study-mcdonalds-business-strategies-in-india/

http://www.mcdonaldsindia.net/pressreleases/McDonald's%20india

%20(North%20%20East)%20-%20Media%20Fact

%20Book_October_2011.pdf

http://www.scribd.com/doc/11520753/Marketing-Strategies-of-McDonalds

http://www.slideshare.net/hemanthcrpatna/a-project-on-mc-donalds-

8319978

Group - 2 Page 19
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SERVQUALhttp://indiafoodfranchise.blogspot.in/2011/12/mcdonalds-franchise-set-to-grow-focus.htmlhttp://indiafoodfranchise.blogspot.in/2011/12/mcdonalds-franchise-set-to-grow-focus.htmlhttp://www.mbaknol.com/management-case-studies/case-study-mcdonalds-business-strategies-in-india/http://www.mbaknol.com/management-case-studies/case-study-mcdonalds-business-strategies-in-india/http://www.mcdonaldsindia.net/pressreleases/McDonald's%20india%20(North%20%20East)%20-%20Media%20Fact%20Book_October_2011.pdfhttp://www.mcdonaldsindia.net/pressreleases/McDonald's%20india%20(North%20%20East)%20-%20Media%20Fact%20Book_October_2011.pdfhttp://www.mcdonaldsindia.net/pressreleases/McDonald's%20india%20(North%20%20East)%20-%20Media%20Fact%20Book_October_2011.pdfhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/11520753/Marketing-Strategies-of-McDonaldshttp://www.slideshare.net/hemanthcrpatna/a-project-on-mc-donalds-8319978http://www.slideshare.net/hemanthcrpatna/a-project-on-mc-donalds-8319978http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SERVQUALhttp://indiafoodfranchise.blogspot.in/2011/12/mcdonalds-franchise-set-to-grow-focus.htmlhttp://indiafoodfranchise.blogspot.in/2011/12/mcdonalds-franchise-set-to-grow-focus.htmlhttp://www.mbaknol.com/management-case-studies/case-study-mcdonalds-business-strategies-in-india/http://www.mbaknol.com/management-case-studies/case-study-mcdonalds-business-strategies-in-india/http://www.mcdonaldsindia.net/pressreleases/McDonald's%20india%20(North%20%20East)%20-%20Media%20Fact%20Book_October_2011.pdfhttp://www.mcdonaldsindia.net/pressreleases/McDonald's%20india%20(North%20%20East)%20-%20Media%20Fact%20Book_October_2011.pdfhttp://www.mcdonaldsindia.net/pressreleases/McDonald's%20india%20(North%20%20East)%20-%20Media%20Fact%20Book_October_2011.pdfhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/11520753/Marketing-Strategies-of-McDonaldshttp://www.slideshare.net/hemanthcrpatna/a-project-on-mc-donalds-8319978http://www.slideshare.net/hemanthcrpatna/a-project-on-mc-donalds-8319978


20/20

http://www.icmrindia.org/Short%20Case%20Studies/Services

%20Marketing/CLSM017.htm

Group - 2 Page 20
http://www.icmrindia.org/Short%20Case%20Studies/Services%20Marketing/CLSM017.htmhttp://www.icmrindia.org/Short%20Case%20Studies/Services%20Marketing/CLSM017.htmhttp://www.icmrindia.org/Short%20Case%20Studies/Services%20Marketing/CLSM017.htmhttp://www.icmrindia.org/Short%20Case%20Studies/Services%20Marketing/CLSM017.htm

services marketing_project report_group 6

Documents