Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Completed at
In Partial Fulfillment for the requirement of the Award of Post Graduate Diploma in Business Management 2009-2011 SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:
Neha Tomar
PGDBM II Sem
Jaipur
CERTIFICATE
Certified that the project report entitled To indicate the importance of consumer based brand equity on the consumers perception of the brand Aquaguard and to suggest measures to increase the lead generation through BTL activities for Eureka Forbes Limited is a record of project done independently by Miss Neha Tomar under my guidance and supervision and that it has not previously formed the basis for the award of any degree, fellowship or associate ship to him.
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that this project entitled To indicate the importance of consumer based brand equity on the consumers perception of brand Aquaguard and to suggest measures to increase lead generation through BTL activities for Eureka Forbes limited is a bonafide record of work done by me during the course of summer project work and that it has not previously formed the basis for the award to me for any degree/diploma, associate ship, fellowship or other similar title of any other institute.
Date:
Neha Tomar
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The Summer Project on To indicate the importance of consumer based brand equity on the consumers perception of brand Aquaguard and to suggest ways to increase lead generation through BTL activities for Eureka Forbes Limited.offered a great learning experience. During the tenure of this project, I was fortunate to have interacted with people, who in their own capacities have encouraged and guided me. Firstly, I would like to express our sincere gratitude to HR Department of Eureka forbes Ltd. for providing me the opportunity to undergo summer training in Marketing Department of such a reputed organization. Working with one of the most renowned organizations was a great learning experience. My sincere thanks go to Mr. Tapan Khurana (Area head of marketing) for trusting my potential by giving me such a valuable project. I would also thank him for providing his guidance and support in completing this project. Without his support & critical evaluation this project could not have been completed successfully. I extend my heartiest thanks to Brig. S. K. Gaur (Director FMS-IRM), FMSIRM faculty members for their regular assistance all through the project and I would also thank Prof. Asha Sharma, (Project Guide, FMS-IRM), for the direction and purpose she gave to this project through her invaluable insights, which constantly inspired me to think beyond the obvious.
Neha Tomar
PGDBM II Sem.
Table of contents: Certificate Declaration Acknowledgment Table of contents Executive summary Chapter 1
Introduction Problem statement Objectives of the study Hypothesis Research methodology Type of research Research approach Sampling Data collection Statistical tools Limitation of the study Review of the literature
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Analtysis of the brand equity attributes Analysis of the consumer behavior influencers Analysis of the BTL activities
Chapter 4
Summary of the findings
Chapter 5
Bibliography Webliography
Chapter 6
Appendix
Figc.4)overall view of consumer responses on being satisfied with after sales service of the product Figc.5)model based division of consumer responses on aquaguard being the best choice Figc.6)overall view of consumer responses on aquaguard being the best choice Figc.7)model based view of consumer responses on Aquaguard being innovative in technology Figc.8)overall view of consumer responses on Aquaguard being innovative in technology FigD.1)awareness of difference between RO and UV technology among consumers FigD.2)importance of special attractive offers in buying(based on consumer responses) FigD.3)Importance of ISI certification for buying a water purifier(based on consumer responses) FigD.4)importance of IMA certification for buying water purifier(based on consumer responses FigD.5)importance of water testing prior to buying(based on consumer responses) FigD.6)importance of after sales service in purchase decision FigD.7)consumer expectation of appropriate maintenance cost(based on consumer responses) FigD.8)importance of product to be electricitry consumption efficient(based on consumer responses FigD.9)sources through which consumer came across the product(based on consumer responses) FigD.10)whether or not display at canopy prompt buying(based on consumer responses) FigD.11)consumer willingness to continue relationship with EFL because of free service camps FigD12)consumer response on whether information is provided during free service camps FigD.13)consumer intention to exchange old products with new ones FigD.14)intention to buy other products of eureka forbes Table 1) mean ranks of all the attributes of brand equiy constructs and chi sqare statistic Table1.1)average maen rank or brand equity rating of brand loyalty and brand image Table1.2)average mean rank or brand eqity rating of perceived quality Table 2)table for obtained mean ranks and sum of ranks through mann whitney test as well as mann whitney u statistic
Executive summmary:
Eureka Forbes ltd. was founded in 1982 as a joint venture between Tata Sons Forbes Gokak and Swedens Electrolux. The SP group however, fully acquired the company in 2002-03 when it bought out the Tatas holding the Forbes gokak and subsequently, Electroluxs in the joint venture. This company of the Shapoorji Pallongi (SP) groups Forbes gokak ltd. has succeeded in making its centre piece aqua guard brand synonymous with home water purification. Over 71 million liters of aqua guard water are consumed daily across the country, the model also being the only purifier to be endorsed by the Indian medical association. Besides, EFL has introduced the worlds first universal water purifier aquaguard total Sensa, which auto senses and selects the optimum purification technology. EFL has expanded its portfolio with security solutions, including home security intrusion alarm, excess control, fire alarm, and surveillance systems. The company additionally offers industrial solutions, such as industry water purifiers,
commercial and industrial vaccum cleaners, hard floor cleaning and maintenance machines, high pressure cleaners, and cleaning and hygiene products. The objective of this study is to identify the key driver of the customer based brand equity for the brand Aquaguard (brand loyalty, brand image, perceived quality) thereby affecting the customers perception of the brand and to suggest measures to increase lead generation through BTL activities for Eureka Forbes Limited. Broadly it can be classified in the following phases (1) A qualitative study defining the parameters to be measured and pre testing of the questionnaire (2) designing and administrating a questionnaire survey to assess the response of the respondents among our representative set of customers. Friedman test was used to find out the significant mean ranks for the different attributes falling within the brand equity constructs. The average mean rank or brand equity rating for each brand equity construct was then calculated and compared. We could conclude that Brand Loyalty had the least, Brand image had the second highest and perceived quality had the highest brand equity rating. Brand loyalty scoring the least brand equity rating is a logical issue because even when the customer seems to be satisfied with the product they dont seem to be too loyal. Its possible reasons are1. Low switching cost for customer i.e. cheaper options available for functionally similar products 2. Dissatisfaction among existent customers because of inefficient after sales service by the company. Therefore steps should be taken to make existing customers more brand loyal. Perceived quality got the highest rating and this is justified since it is the perceived quality of the product that is when linked with satisfaction has a positive
influence on consumer purchase intention. Hence Eureka Forbes should try to prevent creating a shoddy image of product in terms of quality and service. Brand image score was quite close to perceived quality and thus reflects its importance. The brands with high brand equity seem to have higher brand associations. Null hypothesis designed for the study states that for the consumer of an established brand of a health product like water purifier, the perception of the quality and the technology used in different product varieties (RO and UV) does not differ significantly. Mann Whitney test was used and was found out that RO products scored higher mean ranks than UVproducts in both respects (quality as well as technology) even when both the types of products belong to the same Aquaguard brand. This signifies that the perception of the quality and technology of the product is independent of the brand name a customer owns and RO products seem to be perceived as better in quality and technology as compared to UV products which supports the increasingly growing faith of buyers in RO products.Although its interesting to note that this research also found out that approximately 60% of those surveyed were unaware of the actual difference between the RO and UV technology. BTL activities aimed at increasing the brand image and brand awareness of Eureka Forbes water purifiers through 1 organizing free service camps for customers across city. 2 free aqua guard installation. 3 making customer aware of new products of the company and explain their need to them.
10
Activities like free service camps help in strengthening ties with the customers and increase satisfaction level.BTL activities can be better designed by properly understanding the consumer buying behavior
INTRODUCTION
Approximately 80% of diseases in India are caused by water borne microorganisms. This is true in rural as well as urban India. However, awareness of health risks linked to unsafe water is still very low among the rural population. The few who treat resort to boiling or use domestic candle filters. In comparison the urban Indian is definitely more health conscious and understands the necessity of purifying water before it is fit for consumption. Even so, it is estimated that roughly 7% of urban Indians use non manual water purifiers. More Indians need to be become aware of the importance of installing water purifiers .Though quite a few city dwellers still boil water ,many are still switching over to modern domestic water purifiers.Electrical or chemical based home purification systems are most suitable for urban households because they require little or no manual operation and
11
depending on the technology can eliminate biological toxins, chemical toxins and excessive salts. The main contaminants are however microorganisms. UV purifiers and advanced chemical based systems deal effectively with viruses and bacteria. This is one of the reasons why UV based purifiers are most widely used water purifiers in India. It is estimated that around 80% of urban dwellers do not purify tap water. Many of them are from the low income strata and cannot afford UV or RO purifier.They are the potential buyers of economical but effective chemical purifiers.This is the market that HUL and Eureka Forbes are tapping aggressively.Chemical purifiers, together account for 20% of water purifiers sold.Both are becoming increasingly popular as they are affordable and effective.The two brands are reported to be growing at 100% per annum. Also they do not run on electricity and are ideal for places where power supply is unpredictable.Neither do they need continuous water supply. It is estimated that roughly two thirds belong to UV water purifier while one third is shared between RO and chemical purifiers. In the UV market segment, Aquaguard is the clear market leader with 68% market share. Other brands are Philips intelligent water purifier and Kents RO. The UV purifier market is growing at a slower rate than chemical purifiers. RO purifiers which are rather expensive and not the preferred option in many areas have a smaller share of the market. In the RO segment Eureka Forbes is the major player with 60% market share while 40% share is with Kent. That the Indian market is lucrative is evident from the fact that players such as Kent and HUL have stepped into the market
Problem statement
Building strong brand equity. Maximize brand value .
To Increase sales .
12
To find out the brand equity rating for each of the three dimensions of consumer based brand equity (i.e Brand loyalty, Brand image and Percieved quality) for the brand Aquaguard. To obtain a comparative account of the consumer perception of the brand based on division of respondents into RO and UV consumers.
To identify the key factor or attributes that are central to customers mind with respect to a water purifier and thus influence his buying decision. To give suggestions to increase lead generation through BTL activities
HYPOTHESIS
H0: For the consumer of an established brand of a health product like water purifier,his perception of the quality and the technology used in different products (RO and UV) of that same brand does not differ significantly. H1: For the consumer of an established brand of a health product like water purifier,his perception of the quality and the technology used in different products (RO and UV) of that same brand differs significantly.
Research methodology
Marketing research is the systematic identification, collection, analysis, and dissemination of information for the purpose of assisting management in decision making related to the identification and solution of problems and opportunities in marketing. The objective of this research is to identify the factors which affect the consumer purchase decisions and also to identify the key driver of customer based brand equity shaping the consumers perception of the brand Aquaguard.
13
The result of this study could serve as a decision making tool to help Eureka Forbes managers maximize the value of their brand. (A) Type of research (A.1) Descriptive: Descriptive research design is a scientific method which involves observing the behaviour of a subject without influencing it in any way.For the purpose of this study; descriptive research design is used
Deductive approach has to do with the building up of theory and hypothesis after reading literatures i.e. testing theory.For the purpose of the thesis, deductive approach was used.
14
Survey was conducted in the Jaipur city of Rajasthan. A sample size of 100 respondents( companys customers) was taken for the purpose of the study.
Secondary data for the purpose of the study was collected from internet and magazines.
(A.4.3) Data Collection The project was carried out in two phases where the information was collected from various sources and analyzed in order to assess the importance of different attributes of brand equity on the consumers perception of the brand Aquaguard and also to identify the customers purchasing guiding forces, followed by analyzing and devising below the line activities for Eureka Forbes Ltd.
Qualitative study defining the parameters to be measured and pre testing of the questionnaire Designing and administrating a questionnaire survey to assess the brand equity attributes and factors affecting customers buying decision among a representative set of customers.
15
(A.5.1) SPSS-15
Mann Whitney U test- It is a non parametric test that is used to compare the means of two samples that come from the same population. It is done for 2 independent samples
Friedman test- A non parametric test used to test that the multiple ordinal responses come from the same population. It is done for related samples
2.4 Limitations of the Study Time constraint Small sample size Limited area of coverage
16
of brand equity i.e. brand awareness, brand association and perceived quality. They tested whether brand equity has an affect on brand perception, intention and attitude. The result of their study found out that brand equity has effect on perception, intention and attitude. Low and lamb Jr (2000) and Prasad and Dev (2000) also adopted four of Aaker (1991) component i.e. brand awareness, perceived quality, brand loyalty and brand association. Yoo et al (2000) adopted three of Aaker (1991) component i.e. perceived quality, brand association and brand loyalty. Their study suggested and tested a model and the result revealed that these dimensions contribute to brand equity. Simon and Sullivan (1993) claim that the best method for measuring brand equity depends on the objective market based data which give room for comparison overtime and across firm. Simon and Sullivian (1993) used the word incremental utility to refer to brand equity. Park and Srinivasan (1994) refer to brand equity as the distinction between the overall brand preference and the multi attribute preference depending on the objectively measured attribute level. Agarwal and Rao (1996) also refer to brand equity as the total quality and choice intention. From the above it is clear that brand equity is viewed in different ways by different researchers.
17
COMPANY PROFILE
Eureka Forbes is Rs 10 billion multi-product multi-channel corporations which is a part for Shaporji Pallonji group and employs over 7000 employees. It has evolved as a leader in domestic and industrial water purification systems, vacuum cleaners, air purifiers and security solutions. Eureka Forbes were the first to introduce domestic [water purifiers] the ''Aquaguard'' - model - as well as [vacuum cleaners] to India in the 1980s. In order to introduce these previously unknown products to a society in which nationwide commercial campaigns were impossibility, the company had to pioneer another innovation - direct selling. The corps of suit-clad Eureka Forbes salesmen were the first such in the country and were a tremendous success. They are now Asia's largest direct selling organization with a 5,000 strong direct sales force touching 1.25 million Indian homes and adding 1,500 customers daily. Such was the success of Eureka Forbes that ''Aquaguard'' has now become a synonym for water purifier in India, like ''Xerox'' for [photocopying] . "The promise was clear: To create a company that wouldn't be about bricks, mortar or sales graphs, but driven by something far more potent. Something that would stand the test of time relationships."
18
19
In 1999, Eureka Forbes Ltd. (Eureka Forbes), the leading vacuum cleaner and water/air purifier Equipment Company, announced a major policy change that came as a surprise to the Indian corporate world. The company, regarded as the pioneer of direct marketing in India, was planning to focus more on the retailing business in the future. Commenting on this decision, S Goklaney, Managing Director, Eureka Forbes, said, "Direct sales permits us to exploit only the top end of the market." This move was in accordance with the company's plans to increase the visibility of its products. The company planned to make its products available in retail outlets through its dealer network, spread across 2,600 dealers.
20
3.3 Vision:
A happy, healthy, safe and pollution-free environment based on trust and lasting relationship with customers.
3.4 Mission:
To build sustainable relationships with customers as their friend for life by satisfying their evolving health, hygiene, safety and lifestyle through our people whose entrepreneurial spirit and ambition is fuelled by the culture of people, learning , earning and fun. Our products and services that reflect innovation become quality benchmark and provide value for money. Our policies and practices that are fare, transparent and constantly improved to maximise stakeholder satisfaction and achieve market leadership.
3.5 Product range (water purifiers): 3.5.1 Aquaguard: Economy Aquaguard classic Aquaguard compact Special usages Aquaguard booster Aquaguard hi-flo Aquaguard total NF Aquaguard ultra Aquaguard total RO Total protection Aquaguard Gold Nova
21
Reliability Statistics
22
c.1) Respondents perception of Aqua guard as a quality product according to the Model they use
23
Bar Chart
model
RO UV
30
20
Count
26
10
13 9 5 6
19
12 10
quality
65.45% of the UV consumers whereas 68.7% of the RO consumers more or less agree that Aquaguard is a quality product.
c.2)Overall analysis :
24
q uality
50
40
Frequency
30
47
20
10
22 18 13
quality
Strongly disagree 0%
Disagree 18%
Agree 47%
25
c.3) Respondents view about the after sales service being upto the expectation on the basis of: Model used
Bar Chart
model
RO UV
30
20
Count
28 23
10
11 8 6 3 9 6 4 2
strongly agree
service
The above chart shows that 55.55%% of the RO customers while 58.18% of the UV customers more or less agree to being satisfied with the after sales service
c.4)Overall analysis:
26
service
60
50
40
Frequency
30
51
20
10
14
20 9
service
Disagree 20%
Cant say 9%
Agree 51%
Strongly agree 6%
c.5) Respondents perception of Aquaguard as their best choice on the basis of:
27
Model used
B ar C hart
m odel
RO UV 20
25
15
Count
10
21
20
15 11 9 5 2 9
5
4 4
choice
63.33% of the UV customers whereas 64.37% of the RO customers more or less agree that aquaguard is their best choice
c.6)Overall analysis:
28
ch oice
50
40
Frequency
30
20
41
24
10
20
0 stron gly d isa gree d isa gree can 't sa y ag ree stron gly a gree
cho ice
Strongly disagree 7%
disagree 8%
agree 41%
29
c.7) Respondentsperception of Aquaguard as a technologically innovative product on the basis of the Model used
Bar Chart
model
RO UV 20
25
Count
15
25
10
17 16
10
technology
From the above it can be inferred that nearly 73% of the RO customers and nearly 64% of the UV customers more or less agree that aquaguard is innovative in technology
c.8)overall analysis
30
technology
50
40
Frequency
30
20
42
26
10
12
18
strongly disagree
disagree
can't say
agree
strongly agree
technology
Strongly disagree 2%
disagree 12%
Agree 42%
31
Analysis
b.5)Respondentsperception of Aquaguard as a trustworthy and reliable brand on the basis of model used:
B ar C hart
m odel
RO UV
30
20
Count
27 23
10
9 6 3 3 7 5
trust
65.4% of the UV customers and nearly 68 % of the RO customers more or less agree to Aquaguard being a trustworthy brand
32
(b.6)overall analysis
tru s t
50
40
Frequency
30
49
20
10
16 12 7 16
tru s t
Strongly disagree 7%
disagree 16%
Agree 49%
33
b.7)Respondentsperception of Aquaguard as a well established brand as compared to others on the basis of the model used:
Bar Chart
model
RO UV
30
20
Count
28
10
20
10 7 5 3 7 8
11
strongly disagree
disagree
can't say
agree
strongly agree
established
Nearly 71% of the UV and 66.66% of the RO customers more or less agree that their brand is well established as compared to other brands.
34
b.8)overall analysis:
e s ta b lis h e d
50
40
Frequency
30
48
20
10
15 12 4
21
e s ta b lis h e d
Strongly disagree 4%
disagree 12%
agree 48%
35
b.1)Respondents perception of Aquaguard as being able to provide clean and safe drinking water on the basis of model used
Bar Chart
model
RO UV
30
20
Count
29
10
22
8 3
7 5
prom ise
Nearly 64% of the RO customers and nearly 65% of the UV customers moreor less agree that aquaguard has provided them safe and clean drinking water.
36
b.2)overall analysis
p ro m is e
60
50
40
Frequency
30
51
20
10
11 13 11 14
p ro m is e
Strongly disagree
disagree
Cant say
Agree
Strongly agree
37
11%
13%
11%
51%
14%
b.3)Respondents perception of Aquaguard as a value for money product On the basis of model used
Bar Chart
model
RO UV
30
20
Count
27 22
10
9 4 5 6 6 7 5
vfm
38
The above chart shows that 65.5%% of the UV customers and 64.44% of the RO customers for money. more or less agree that the brand has provided good value
b.4)Overall analysis:
v fm
50
40
Frequency
30
49
20
10
15 9 11 16
v fm
Strongly disagree
disagree
Cant say
Agree
Strongly agree
39
9%
15%
11%
49%
16%
40
Bar Chart
model
RO UV
30
20
Count
29
23
10
10 7 4 4 4 7 7 5
updation
61.8% of the UV customers and 66.67% of the RO customers more or less agree to update their water purifier with the same brand next time.
(a.2)overall analysis:
41
updation
60
50
40
Frequency
30
52
20
10
8 11
17 12
updation
Strongly disagree 8%
disagree 11%
agree 52%
42
model used
Bar Chart
model
RO UV
40
30
Count
20
31
10
21
10 5 5 6 6 7 4 5
recommend
62.2% of the RO customers and nearly 65.45% of the UV customers more or less agreeto recommending the brand to others.
(a.4)overall analysis
43
re c o m m e n d
60
50
40
Frequency
30
52
20
10
10
16 10 12
re c o m m e n d
Disagree 16%
agree 52%
44
(a.5)Respondents view on being satisfied during use of the product: on the basis of model used
Bar Chart
m odel
RO UV
40
30
Count
20
31 27
10
12 6 7 4 3 4
strongly disagree
disagree
can't say
agree
strongly agree
satisfaction
63.63% of the UV customers while 66.3% of the RO customers more or less agree that aquaguard has satisfied them during use
(a.6)overall analysis
45
s a tis fa c tio n
60
50
40
Frequency
30
58
20
10
6
18 11 7
s a tis fa c tio n
Strongly disagree 6%
disagree 18%
agree 58%
Strongly agree 7%
46
(a.7)Respondents willingness to pay a higher price for the brand as compared to others. on the basis of model used:
Bar Chart
model
RO UV
30
20
Count
26
10
20
10 7 5 5 7 7 6 7
premium
60% of the UVcustomers while nearly 58% of the RO customers more or less agree to pay a higher price for the Aquaguard brand as compared to others
47
(a.8)overall analysis:
p re m iu m
50
40
Frequency
30
45
20
10
10
18 14 13
p r e m iu m
disagree 18%
agree 45%
48
Friedman test
was used to calculate the mean ranks of all the brand attributes in order to identify the most important brand equity attribute which affects the consumer perception of the brand. This test was conducted directly with the help of the software SPSS. The data was inserted in the software and the test was applied for calculating the mean ranks for the components of different attributes of brand equity.
Table 1
Attributes Updation Recommend Satisfaction Premium Promise Value for money Trustworthy Established Quality Service Choice Technology Test Statistics(a) N Chi-Square Df Asymp. Sig. 100 42.367 11
.000
Mean Rank 5.85 6.14 6.06 5.15 6.57 6.55 6.73 6.89 7.51 5.67 7.29 7.02
49
The t statistic shows the asymp sig as .000 which is less than the significance
level of .05. Small significance level indicates that at least one of the variables differs from others. Because a chi square statistic as extreme as 58.63 with 11 degrees of freedom is unlikely to have arisen by chance we conclude that customer hold different preferences for the different attributes of the brand constructs.
Overall brand equity rating of brand loyalty, brand image and perceived quality:It can be calculated by taking out the
average mean ranks of all the attributes related to a particular component.
50
51
Hence, Brand loyalty showed the least brand equity rating while Perceived
quality showed the highest brand equity rating which indicates that the perceived quality of a product has the greatest influence on the consumers perception of the brand with brand image following it. But there is a small difference between the brand equity rating of both perceived quality and Mean Rank Sum of Ranks 45 56.23 2530.50 55 45.81 2519.50 100 45 56.59 2546.50 55 45.52 2503.50 100 brand image which shows that these two things have almost equal impact and both are extremely important affecting the consumers perception of the brand. model Quality RO UV Total Technology RO UV Total N
52
Grouping Variable: model The p values Mann-Whitney U of .043 979.500 963.500 and . Wilcoxon W 2519.500 2503.500 045 are Z less -2.021 -2.000 than the Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) alpha .043 .045 level of .05 and hence we can reject our null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis. Thus we can say that the UV and the RO product customers differ significantly in the perception about the quality and the technology used in their respective products. From the sum of ranks shown in the above table we can conclude that the RO products seem to be perceived as better in quality and technology then the UV products. quality Technology
53
Part 2
ANALYSIS OF CONSUMER BEHAVIOR
54
INFERENCE:
Approximately 60% of consumers are not aware of the actual difference between RO and UV technology while 40% of people are aware of the difference.
55
INFERENCE:
29% of consumers agree that they did consider special attractive offers at the time of purchase of water purifier while 71% people did not consider it.
56
INFERENCE:
79% of the total consumers consider that I.S.I. certification is extremely important while 21% of the total consumers consider that I.S.I. certification is important.
57
D.4) Importance of IMA (Indian Medical Association) endorsement in buying a water purifier
INFERENCE:
10% of the consumers consider that I.M.A. endorsement is extremely important, 39% of the consumers states that I.M.A. endorsement is important 46% of the consumers are not sure.While 5% dont consider it important.
D.5)
58
INFERENCE:
13% of consumers thinks that water testing is not necessary and 87% of consumers thinks that water testing is necessary before buying the product.
59
INFERENCE
For 60% of the customers, after sales service is an extremely important consideration with respect to water purifier, for 37% it was important while 3% are not sure of it
60
INFERENCE
12% consumers think that Rs0-300 is the appropriate maintenance cost, 61% consumers think that Rs300-800 is the appropriate maintenance cost and 27% consumers think that Rs800 thatRs800-1500 is the appropriate maintenance cost for water purifier annually.
61
INFERENCE:
53% of the consumers consider that electricity consumption efficiency of water purifier is extremely important and 39% of the consumers thinks that electricity consumption efficiency of water purifier is important.8% are not sure of it.
62
D.9)
INFERENCE:
18% of consumers got aware of the product through references, 16 % through newspaper/TV, 24% through product display and 37 % through door knocking.
63
INFERENCE:
55% of consumers say that product display at canopy/exhibition plays important role in prompting buying and 45% of consumers says that product display at canopy/exhibition does not prompt buying .
64
INFERENCE:
54% consumers think that they will like to continue relationship with aquagaurd because it is closer to customers through free service camps, 12% consumers think that they will not like to continue relationship and 34% consumers cant say anything.
65
INFERENCE:
41% of consumers states that information related to new introduced technology products is provided during free service camps and 59% of consumers states that information related to new introduced technology products is not provided in free service camps.
66
INFERENCE:
67
62% consumers states that they would like to exchange their product after the introduction of new products, 2% consumers states that they will not like to change their product and 34% states that they cant say anything.
INFERENCE:
55% of consumers states that they are intending to buy other products of Eureka Forbes and 15% of consumers states that they are not intending to buy other products of Eureka Forbes.While 30% of them are not sure .
68
From the analysis done on the basis of the survey conducted it was inferred that perceived quality showed the highest brand equity rating and brand loyalty showed the least brand equity rating .
After sales service offered by the company is an important consideration for the customer.
For the same brand, the RO products are perceived to be superior in quality and technology as compared to UV products.
ISI certification is an important consideration while buying whereas the customer is less sensitive towards IMA endorsement.
The consumer awareness of the actual difference between RO and UV technology is quite low.
Water testing prior to buying the product is an important consideration for the customer.
69
Special attractive offers do not matter much to the customers at the time of buying.
Customers wouldnt mind exchanging their products with the newly introduced products or models
Electricity consumption efficiency of the product is an important consideration for the customer.
Rs 300-800 is considered an appropriate maintenance cost per annum for the water purifier.
70
71
CONCLUSION:
Among all brand associations Perceived quality helps drive financial performance. A customer might be overly influenced by the previous image of the bad quality of the product. Thus it is critical to protect the brand from gaining a shoddy image. After sales service form an integral part of perceived quality and could be a serious cause of dissatisfaction for the customer if not properly looked into. In todays fast moving world customers dont stick to the product for life. Advertisements and increased options make them switch the brand as soon as they feel the need. Water-purifying companies are using direct selling techniques but of late other methods are also evolving. There is now increased brand awareness among customers and companies should look beyond door to door selling and explore new methods of promotion. Media potential needs to be tapped properly as this is the medium the customer is most exposed to. Moreover there are many different issues that hinder the sales of water purifier like maintaining the uninterrupted electric supply and cost of maintenance. Furthermore the company needs to maintain long lasting relationship with its
72
customers which is possible through proper addressal of the problems of the customers related to product. . Highly committed customers should not be taken for granted. Brand loyalty can be increased by attaining a clear and effective brand identity. A firm should avoid diverting resources from the loyal core towards the non customers and price switchers. The company should not forget the customers once its product has been bought by him.
Bibliography
Webliography
www.google.com www.eurekaforbes.com
73
Questionnaire
Basic details:
Name: Address: ____________________________________ __________________________________
No. of family members: ___________________________ Do you currently own a water purifier of Eureka Forbes? (A) yes (B) no Please mention the name of the model _________________ Key to rank the attributes: Strongly disagree Disagree 1 2
74
3 4 5
Brand Loyalty:
1) I intend to update my water purifier that I currently have with the same product the next timea) 1 b) 2 c) 3 d) 4 e) 5 2) Your water purifier has provided you satisfaction during the use(a) 1 b) 2 c) 3 d) 4 e) 5
3) I would definitely recommend the same water purifier that I have to others as wella) 1 b) 2 c) 3 d) 4 e) 5 4) I am willing to pay a higher price to buy this water purifier instead of other available in the marketa) 1 b) 2 c) 3 d) 4 e) 5
Brand Image:
5) My water purifier has delivered on its assurance of providing clean and safe drinking water-
75
a) 1
b) 2
c) 3
d) 4
e) 5
6) My water purifier has given me good value for moneya) 1 b) 2 c) 3 d) 4 e) 5 7) My water purifier scores high in trustworthiness/ reliabilitya) 1 b) 2 c) 3 d) 4 e) 5 8) I own a well established brand as compared to other brandsa) 1 b) 2 c) 3 d) 4 e) 5
Perceived Quality:
9) I do relate quality to my present water purifiera) 1 b) 2 c) 3 d) 4 e) 5 10) The after sales service being provided has been upto my expectationa) 1 b)2 c)3 d)4 e)5
11) I believe that this is the best choice that I have made out of the available lot in the marketa) 1 b) 2 c) 3 d) 4 e) 5 12) The water purifier I own is innovative in technology used for water purificationa) 1 b) 2 c) 3 d) 4 e) 5
Part 2
76
13) Are you aware of the difference between the RO technology and UV technology used for water purification? a) Yes b) no
If yes, kindly mention_______________________ 14)Did you consider special attractive offers at the time of purchase of the water purifier? a) Yes b) no 15) How important as a criteria the ISI certification for any water purifier is? a) Extremely important b) important c) Not important at all d) not sure 16) How important as a criteria the IMA (Indian Medical Association) endorsement for any water purifier is? a) Extremely important b) important c) Not important d) not sure 17) Do you think water testing is important before buying any water purifier? a) Yes b) no 18) How important do you think is the requirement of a proper after sales service for a product like water purifier? a)extremely important c)cant say b)important d)not important
77
19) What do you think is the appropriate maintenance cost of a water purifier to afford per annum? a) Rs.0-300 c) Rs.800-1500 e) Rs. 2000-3000 b) Rs.300-800 d) Rs.1500-2000
20) How important is the electricity consumption efficiency of any water purifier in buying it ? a) Extremely important c) Not important b) important d) not sure
Q21) How did you first come across a product by EUREKA FORBESa) Reference b) Newspaper/TV c) Product display at canopy/Exhibition/Apartment Activity d) Door knocking e) other sources Q22) Has Product display at Canopy/Exhibition prompted you to buy the product? a) Yes b) No Q23) Will you continue your relationship with Aqua guard keeping in view the free service camps being organized for you? a) Yes b) no c) cant say Q24) Is information related to new technology products provided to you in free service camps? a) Yes b) No
78
Q25) Would you consider exchanging your product with a new introduced product ? a) Yes b) No c) cant say Q26) Are you intending to buy different category product offered by Eureka Forbes e.g. Vacuum cleaners / security system / Air purifiers? a) Yes b) No
79