Evaluation of alternative is the most important stage for consumer buying behavior: The case study of Pizza hut

Abstract
This study is aimed at identifying whether evaluation of alternative is the most important stage for consumer buying behavior. At the very beginning of this project, the researcher has discussed about the background, importance and motivation of the research very carefully. Then, the aim and objectives were presented which dictated the destination of the study. The researcher analyzed and evaluated different published literatures, articles and journals to properly understand the research problem. The views of several authors on a subject matter were cortically evaluated. The authors opinion in support and against were compared and contrasted to reach a decision. The research methodology was prepared carefully considering the aim and objectives of the project. The researcher collected primary data by using survey questionnaire and secondary data were collected from several journals and articles. The researcher used spreadsheets and SPSS version 17 to analyze the collected data. In the findings part of the report the researcher sued frequency table analysis and chi-square tests to make inferences about the numerical findings. Some of the findings were such that evaluation of alternatives is ignored by many of the customers. Therefore, the primarily it can be said that evaluation of alternative is the most important stage for consumer buying behavior but unfortunately many customers ignore it unintentionally. Recommendations were made about restaurants like Pizza hut can utilize the evaluation of alternative stage to react customers in a certain way to bring them to the Pizza hut outlets. The recommendations were the result of in-depth understanding of the research problem and customer response. Finally, a conclusion was made on the whole study which may clearly give a quick overview of the study.

ii

Statement of Authenticity
I have carefully gone through all the rules and regulations of the University of Huddersfield related to the plagiarism issues and research ethics. By doing so, I, hereby declare that this project is explicitly my own work, the result of month long dedication and hard work that does not include any materials from unauthentic and unacknowledged source.

Signature: . Date: .

iii

Acknowledgement
I would like to give my very first thanks to my honorable supervisor.who dedicatedly guided, supported and supervised me all through my study. My heartfelt thanks go to the Managers and employees of Pizza hut who assisted me locate their customers by providing customer database information. Completing this study would be little harder without their sincere assistance. Least but not the last, I am grateful to the respondents who wholeheartedly supported me by providing replies to my query spontaneously. I would not miss thanking my family for giving me endless co-operation and motivation throughout my journey to completing this project.

iv

Table of Contents
Abstract ................................................................................................................................................... ii Statement of Authenticity ..................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgement ................................................................................................................................. iv Chapter one: Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 2 1.1 Background of the research .............................................................................................................. 3 1.2 Rational of the study ......................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Importance of the study ................................................................................................................... 3 1.4 Research Aim .................................................................................................................................... 4 1.5 Research objectives ........................................................................................................................... 4 1.6 Research Question ............................................................................................................................ 4 1.7 Motivation for Choosing the Subject Area........................................................................................ 5 1.8 Structure of this research ................................................................................................................. 5 1.9 Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Chapter 2: Literature Review .................................................................................................................. 7 2.0 Introduction:...................................................................................................................................... 8 Objective one: To assess the evaluation of alternatives stage from organizations and consumers perspectives ............................................................................................................................................. 8 2.1 Influence of Evaluative Criteria ........................................................................................................ 8 2.2 Salience of Evaluative Criteria ......................................................................................................... 9 2.3 Ethical considerations as evaluative criteria: .................................................................................... 9 Objective two: To understand what criteria makes Pizza hut distinctive in evaluation of alternatives stage ...................................................................................................................................................... 11 2.4 Trivial attributes as evaluative criteria: ........................................................................................... 11 2.5 Determinant Attributes.................................................................................................................... 12 2.5.1 Styling: ......................................................................................................................................... 12 2.5.2 Product quality risk and personal risk .......................................................................................... 12 2.6 Price, Brand, and Country of Origin as Evaluative Criteria ........................................................... 13 2.6.1 Price ............................................................................................................................................. 13 2.6.2 Brand Reputation ......................................................................................................................... 14 2.6.3 Country of Origin ......................................................................................................................... 14 Objective Four: To figure out how large brand sees this stage in consumers buying behaviour ........ 15 2.7 Decision Heuristics ......................................................................................................................... 15

2.7.1 Price ............................................................................................................................................. 15 2.7.2 Brand Reputation ......................................................................................................................... 16 2.7.3 Key Product Signals:.................................................................................................................... 16 2.7.4 Market Beliefs:............................................................................................................................. 17 2.7.5 Mere-Possession .......................................................................................................................... 17 2.8 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 17 Chapter 03: Research Methodology ..................................................................................................... 18 3.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 19 3.1 Research Philosophy ....................................................................................................................... 19 3.2 Research Approaches ...................................................................................................................... 19 3.3 Research Strategy............................................................................................................................ 20 3.4 Research choice .............................................................................................................................. 21 3.1.1 Descriptive versus Analytical Research:...................................................................................... 21 3.1.2 Applied versus Fundamental Research: ....................................................................................... 21 3.1.3 Qualitative versus Quantitative Research: ................................................................................... 21 3.1.4 Conceptual versus Empirical: ...................................................................................................... 21 3.5 Data collection ................................................................................................................................ 22 3.6 Data analysis: .................................................................................................................................. 22 3.7 Validity of the research ................................................................................................................... 23 3.8 Research Ethics ............................................................................................................................... 24 3.9 Limitations for this study ................................................................................................................ 24 3.7 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................... 25 Chapter 4: Result and Analysis.............................................................................................................. 26 4.0 Introduction: ................................................................................................................................... 27 4.1 Profile of the participants ............................................................................................................... 27 4.2 Frequency Table Analysis ................................................................................................................ 27 4.3 Chi Square analysis.......................................................................................................................... 29 4.4 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................... 33 Analysis and discussion ......................................................................................................................... 34 4.5 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 34 4.6 Chapter Summary .......................................................................................................................... 36 Chapter Five: Conclusions and Recommendations............................................................................... 37 5.0 Introduction ...................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 5.1 Recommendations .......................................................................................................................... 38
vi

5.2 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................... 39 References ............................................................................................................................................ 40 Appendices............................................................................................................................................ 45

Figure 1: Research Strategy .................................................................................................................. 20

Appendix 2 ............................................................................................................................................ 45 Appendix 3 ............................................................................................................................................ 57 Appendix; 04 ......................................................................................................................................... 88 Appendix 1 ............................................................................................................................................ 45

vii

Chapter one: Introduction

1.0 Introduction
Alternative evaluation is the third step in the decision-making process through which we compare and contrast different solutions to the same marketplace problem. Ford and Smith (1987) claimed that alternative evaluation includes evaluating several products, services, retail outlets, and/or brands to determine and choose which one best meet the desired benefits. However, this paper reviews whether Evaluation of alternative is the most important stage for consumer buying behaviour or not. Although alternative evaluation is one of the most important stages of consumer buying behaviour, consumers skip this stem in some cases, for example, habitual buying patterns. Consumers make buying decisions after getting enough information that allows them to determine and compare the relevant and feasible alternatives. Einhorn and Hogarth (1981) found that consumers, in response to a particular problem, looks for various evaluative criteria (product attributes), for example, consumer might want to evaluate cost, size, power source, capabilities, display size, and warranty before purchasing a calculator. This is research is important due to several reasons as it tried to discover the necessity of evolution of alternative stage in customer choice making and previous researches on this issue do not provide proper conclusions on this. This research is designed to reveal the consumer behaviour in a specific stage of consumer decision making process that will assist formulate strategies for companies like Pizza hut.

1.1 Background of the research

Customer buying behaviour is one of the most discussed topics in the world. Even though, there exists numerous controversies regarding how customers think, how they make purchase decisions, what stage of purchase decision is more important and so on. The researcher found it interesting to explore whether the evolution of alternative is the most important stage in customer buying behaviour. As it is a sub topic of social science, there is no simple answer to such questions. Not all the customers are same neither they think in the same way, still not all customers prioritize the same thing equally. Therefore, customer behaviour is a complex set of activities and requires in-depth knowledge and studies. The researcher, worked hard to collect secondary data from several published articles and journals to understand the consumer behaviour. The researcher has also utilized a questionnaire survey to collect primary data. By doing all this, the researcher has tried to explore whether the evaluation of alternatives is the most important stage in consumer buying behaviour.

1.2 Rational of the study

Selecting such a topes is logical because of the highly complex nature of consumer behaviour. Although, there have been enough research work on this field, still there is a scarcity of proper satisfactory answers to consumer behaviour related questions. When many of the marketers are still puzzled regarding the setting and implementing marketing strategies due to the lack proper customer behaviour knowledge, a research on the consumer buying behaviour must supplement the existing base of studies in this field. Therefore, the selection of such research topic is logical in a sense that the study would remove the confusion regarding the customer behaviour.

1.3 Importance of the study

Understanding customer behaviour has become a mandatory task worldwide, especially for marketers and business men. An in-depth understanding of customer preferences and motivations help marketers to set strategies and plans. The study is important for the business men, marketers, researcher, teachers and ultimately the students of social sciences, specially marketing. It is equally important to understand the stages in the customer purchase decision
3

making. All the stages in the customer decision making are not equally important. The research is meant for identifying whether evaluation of alternative is the most important stage in customer decision making. The importance of such studies have been mentioned by Bone and France (2001) where they claimed that partial understanding of customer behavior can be devastating. Therefore, a full and in-depth understanding is mandatory. Therefore, the research is important to remove the misinterpretations or conception regarding the important stages in consumer buying behavior.

1.4 Research Aim

The aim of this project is to analyze how organizations think and act in the evaluation of alternatives stage in consumers buying decision process, what is the major impact of this stage on organizations and how a company can evaluate this stage to get favorable decision in consumers buying process.

1.5 Research objectives

To assess the evaluation of alternatives stage from organizations and consumers perspectives

To understand what criteria makes Pizza hut distinctive in evaluation of alternatives stage

To understand how consumer buying decisions work To figure out how large brand sees this stage in consumers buying behavior To know what consumers evaluate in this stage to make decision

1.6 Research Question

The main research question for this project is: Is the evaluation of alternative is the most important stage in customer buying behaviour?

1.7 Motivation for Choosing the Subject Area

The researcher, after actively understanding the research problem, was deeply motivated to work on this project. The researcher assumes, study on such a topic would satisfy his inquisitive mind. The researcher has always been interested in discovering the facts regarding this vast world and human behavior especially attracts him to the fullest. However, understanding consumer behavior has become mandatory for todays markets, hence, works on customer behavior is highly appreciated. However, the major motivations of the researcher to perform this project were as under: Low availability of customer data regarding the customer behavior Lack of in-depth research on this specific issue Lack of market knowledge To add some inferences with the existing base of studies

1.8 Structure of this research

This study starts with an introduction where the researcher discussed background, rational, importance of the research followed by the aim and objectives. Then, the researcher included research question and motivation for selecting the subject area. In chapter two the researcher compared and contrasted opinions of several authors regarding the research problem. Chapter there discussed regarding selecting research approach and strategy where the researcher used questioner survey to collect primary data. In chapter four, the research used spreadsheets and SPSS tools to analyse the data. Finally, frequency tables and chi-square tests were used to make inferences. In chapter five a discussion regarding the findings was presented followed by some recommendations.

1.9 Summary
In this chapter, the researcher discussed about the background, rational and importance of the study, followed by aim and objective of the research. The researcher also mentioned the research question and motivation for selecting the research area in this chapter. This chapter presents a primary understanding about the importance of the research which will take him to complete the next part of the project. In the next chapter the researcher will analyze and
5

evaluate the opinions of several authors regarding the research issue. The opinions will be compared and contrasted in favor and against for a well understanding of the research topic.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.0 Introduction:
In this chapter, the writer will analyze and evaluate the opinions of several authors related to the research area. The opinions of several researchers will be compared and contrasted in favor and against to reach a self understanding. Several citations will also be used to establish a fact regarding the research area. For the literature review several authors were identified who are prominently working on the customer behavior issues. The authors whos opinions are included in the literature review are: Garbarino and Edell (1997); Glowa and Lawson (2000); Grewal et al., (2003); Grewal et al., (1998); Kardes et al., (1993); Laroche et al., (2003); Lindquist et al., (2000); Louviere et al., (2000); Mattei (2000); Mattila and Wirtz (2001); Sen and Johnson (1997); Shiffman and Kanuk (2000); Shiv and Huber (2000); Sippel (1997); Thompson et al., (2005); Walker and Olsen (1997); Zhang and Sood (2002).

Objective one: To assess the evaluation of alternatives stage from organizations and consumers perspectives

2.1 Influence of Evaluative Criteria

Sometimes it becomes difficult to understand the influence of evaluative criteria on consumer choice because they are often used in combination. Thompson et al., (2005) in their study found that a combination of criterion was in the consumers mind formed into a single criterion named exclusiveness that included factors as price, quality of apparel, class of customers, merchandise displays, apparel styles, helpfulness of salespeople and the benefits. In todays marketplace, goods and services providers assume that the utility expected and experienced by consumers uplift as the number of features and their resultant benefits offered increase. In some cases consumers may actually experience feature fatigue, for example, for digital audio and video players, consumers expect that features are added to increase their product capability. At the same time expected product usefulness is seems to be declining as product capabilities carry more evaluation weight before use than after use (Sullivan and Berger, 1987). It is also found from the study that product usability in their satisfaction ratings carries less weight before use than after use which was found for both experts and novices. On the other hand, acceptable alternatives are limited to consumers when the decision is more important to them. According to Sippel (1997) the consumers options
8

becomes narrow to some extent as each additional evaluative criterion is used. To make it clear, a fashion-conscious woman who is searching for the perfect pair of earrings must consider color, shape, and size to the material and weight of the different alternatives to balance the benefits combination that each attribute delivers. In this case, the available options that best match the consumers criteria are limited.

2.2 Salience of Evaluative Criteria

Marketers can identify the characteristics that are most likely to influence target consumers by determining the relative importance or salience of each evaluative criterion. Shiv and Huber (2000) claimed that it is possible for marketers to shape goods and services to satisfy the most salient criteria, so is possible the positioning of a good or service offering in the consumers mind. It is also possible to present the most salient/important attributes and/or benefits information in promotional communications that can become the focus of the copy and visuals presented.

Salience of evaluative criteria can be different from consumer to consumer, product to product, and situation to situation, for example, quality, as an evaluative criterion, hardly matters at all for some products, such as paper clips or low-grade copy paper. Contrary to this, quality does matter for some high visibility goods, such as clothing or gifts, and for durable goods than it is for low visibility, nondurable goods.

2.3 Ethical considerations as evaluative criteria:

Shiffman and Kanuk (2000) found that todays consumers use ethical considerations as an evaluative criterion which is a form of intangible benefit when choosing products and services and/or in making outlet choices at which to buy. Some of the ethical considerations used as evaluative criterion are protection of natural resources, avoidance of unfair labor practices, social or economic justice issues and animal welfare. Consumers may relate ethical dimension for any product or service attribute depending on their viewpoint. The issue of ethical evaluative criteria is not clear always. Therefore, a consumer may ask for information that would help determine whether her or his ethical conditions were being met before making a choice as to be considered as an ethical criteria.

The same thing does not happen always which is found in a study by Sen and Johnson (1997) that consumers intentionally under request important ethical attribute information when comparing ethical and non-ethical evaluative criteria. Another study by Samuleson (1938) also revealed that while choosing wooden desks which was sourced from a rain forest, buyers avoided more information although it was required for them as it may create a tug-of-war feeling and increase emotional stress in making a choice. Therefore, such behavior is called willful ignorance. In a situation where actual purchase decision needs to be made and the product is otherwise attractive, consumers show reluctance to ask for ethical attribute information, for example, in case of the use of child labor to produce cell phones. Positive influence has been recorded of the influence of online product recommendations on consumer online choices for hand calculators and wine in a recent Canadian test where around 22.5 percent of product choices were made without recommendations, contrary to this 45.6 percent derived from online product recommendations checking by consumers. Objective analysis customized to the consumer, had the most influence on product choice among the three sources tested, other consumers, a team of experts, and objective analysis customized to the consumer,. Ample dependence was shown on all three types of recommender sources for experience product like wine and search product as calculator.

Monroe (1973) asserted that under different buying situation salience may also vary, for example, copy paper that is good enough for rough drafts or letters to friends may not be suitable for term paper, report, or photograph printing from a computer file. Some Attributes are salient for some consumers which is again less or not important at all to others. It requires to be remembered that attributes indicate certain deliverable benefits to the consumer. Regarding this Miller and Ginter (1979) opined that the more the consumers prioritize the attribute, the more the points awarded increases.

Mattila and Wirtz (2001) in his study showed two types of consumers type A and type B where they showed that five criteria along with price, style and economy to what 75 percent of the total points were awarded are considered by type A consumers to be salient. In this study consumers prioritized price three times over trunk capacity, twice as important as color and one and one-half times as important as economy. On the other hand, type B consumers considered price and safety for 70 percent of the points for salience whereas price was shown as the most salient and color as the least. Based on the choice criteria marketers need to identify what is a typical Type A and Type B consumer and what types of cars would they
10

buy. Simple analysis like this can be used by marketers to identify salient evaluative criteria and to develop and market their products based on them.

Objective two: To understand what criteria makes Pizza hut distinctive in evaluation
of alternatives stage

2.4 Trivial attributes as evaluative criteria:

Some less important attributes are occasionally considered by consumers as critically important in their impact on product or service choice which are called trivial attributes (Mattila and Wirtz, 2001). Such less important or irrelevant evaluative criteria can influence consumer choice due to several reasons as they are unique to one of the options, draw attention away from more important attributes, or dilute the effect of important attributes. the trivial attribute, in some instances, works as heuristic cue allowing the consumer forgo the more detailed evaluation process of more meaningful attributes. The results can be positive or negative based on the situation. Regarding this Mattei (2000) opined that a consumers intention to use trivial attributes to make the final choice is dependent on the product or service type, the number of choices in the set, the choice situation, and the consumer himself or herself. A consumer who consider trivial attribute might find three hair dryers all have equal power the same with respect to the main features a person and also find feature price and performance similar enough to be seen as equal and deliver the same benefits package. A buyer may be drawn to the silver dryer where color is not an issue, even though the dryers color is a trivial attribute.

Another study has revealed that compared with adults, 11- to 12-year-old children evaluate brand extensions by relying more on surface cues such as brand name characteristics of the new product ignoring the deep cues such as the similarity of category of the new product as compared with the category of the parent product. Children, in another study, rated the extensions with the rhyming names, Coca-Cola Gola iced tea and Wrigleys Higley toffee, more positively compared to the extensions with the non-rhyming names Coca-Cola, Higley iced tea and Wrigleys Gola toffee whereas both types of names are rated by adults.

11

2.5 Determinant Attributes

Determinant attributes are the attributes that have a direct influence on alternative evaluation and consumers final choice which is also known as Salient (important) attributes. March (1978) found that an attribute may not be always determinant but it can be salient always. To make it clear, consider a consumer who is comparing three different types of brands of running shoes for which price, materials, and color are the same and so are the perceived benefits tied to these characteristics. These salient criteria are of no value to the consumer in making a choice among the three competing alternatives they, in fact they are all the same. Other criterion, for example, styling, to differentiate among the shoes is sought by the consumers.

2.5.1 Styling:
An important determinant attribute can be the styling of the products that carries its benefits message. Louviere et al., (2000) aptly mentioned that an attribute that seems very minor can become the center of an entire promotional campaign, particularly in the marketing of parity products, where major product differences do not exist at all. According to Louviere (1988) as the competing brands are tied on other, more important, criteria, the criterion can be seen as a determinant.

2.5.2 Product quality risk and personal risk

Product quality risk and personal risk need to be considered while buying perishable items at the grocery store. Consumers may be exposed to this factors related to product quality risk are functional, performance and physical risks. Shoppers keep it in mind as perishable items reaches expiration date and health risks are clear to them. For such products the expiration date becomes a determinant attribute. In case the product fails, the negative emotions felt by a consumer develop personal risk. Lindquist et al., (2000) mentioned that others form impressions about the consumers regarding how consumers feel about themselves and how they feel about the frustration resulted in by a financial loss. If the shopper perceives higher levels of product quality risk, the consumers increasingly checks the expiration dates of products. Besides, experienced consumers who consume at a high rate at households are more sensitive at checking expiration dates compared to those with less experience.

12

Lichtenstein and Bearden (1989) found six types of perishables and ranked according to perceived highest to lowest product quality risk as, beef, chicken, yogurt, milk, lettuce, and carrots. Frequency of expiration date checking cannot be predicted upon personal risk. The buying situation of consumers can affect which benefits are determinant and which are not although they typically first use physical or psychological product benefits to judge product categories or brands. Moreover, the evaluation process can be influenced by when and where products are used, how they are used, why they are used, by whom they are used, and with whom they are used. An experienced consumer selecting cheese for a dinner party is likely to use determinant attributes as country of origin, region, type, softness-hardness and age. The same consumer, for a picnic with friends is likely to use determinant attributes as price and popularity among the group. Likewise, Laroche et al., (2003) cited that the consumer planning a special evening out may choose very different benefits as determinant criteria in selecting restaurants than the consumer who is out shopping at the mall and wants a quick snack. It is essential for marketers to identify benefits criteria that are salient and determinant for each market group targeted because the salience of evaluative criteria varies from product to product, from situation to situation, and from consumer to consumer. Only then the Products and promotions can be developed effectively.
Objective Three: To understand how consumer buying decisions work

2.6 Price, Brand, and Country of Origin as Evaluative Criteria

An extensive range of evaluative criteria are used by consumers to compare products and brands. Two most common evaluative criteria used by consumers are price and brand reputation. In this regard, Kollat and Willett (1987) opined that consumers also use country of origin as an evaluative criteria for certain product or service categories.

2.6.1 Price
Price has the most significant influence in alternative evaluation for most consumers and in many buying situations. Therefore, marketers rely on price in effective promoting and retailing to persuade consumers to a wide range of goods and services ranging from food products and household items to major appliances and cars to brokerage services and fastfood restaurants. Kardes et al., (1993) think that price as an evaluative criterion varies depending on the type and nature of product categories. Price is used as one of a mix of
13

evaluative criteria rather being used in isolation. Consumers often do not think of paying a fixed price for certain product rather they look for acceptable price ranges. Some factors help determine acceptable price ranges, for example, past purchases, perception of product benefits and perception of possible product costs.

Consumers judge the fairness of a price based on prior prices, competitive prices, estimated sellers costs and a perceived normal profit. In some cases, dual entitlement principle is seen to in effect whereby consumers expect producers to consider community standards of costs and profits while setting a price.

2.6.2 Brand Reputation

In evaluating alternatives, brand reputation exerts second major influence. Regarding this, Grewal et al., (1998) believe that product or service quality is aptly signaled by the brand name to the consumers. A quality brand position leads to greater brand market share and profitability in the long run which intern develop brand power, also called brand equity. Glowa and Lawson (2000) claimed that a positive brand-quality relationship reduces the perceived risks associated with a poor purchase decision. The perceived risk increases if it is difficult for consumers to judge product quality. Improved brand reputation creates trust among consumers that reduces the perceived risk. A study regarding the pharmaceutical industry revealed that, consumers are easily persuaded and convinced to pay higher prices for name-brand prescription drugs even at the presence of identical generic products more cheaply. Brand-name multivitamins are typically perceived as high-risk purchases as consumers place higher importance on good health.

2.6.3 Country of Origin

Another important evaluative criterion can be the country of origin, that is, which nation primarily exports a particular product or service. The study of Garbarino and Edell (1997) revealed that consumer prefer some countries as the best producer of specific products as, Spain for leather goods, United States for computer software, England for dinnerware, Australia for pal gemstones and Germany or Japan for automobiles. Sometimes, determining a products country of origin becomes difficult due to the offshore subcontracting of parts. To achieve positive considerations by consumers recently U.S citizens are outsourcing medical
14

care products. Zhang and Sood (2002), regarding this, found that both uninsured and underinsured consumers prefer medical services overseas to experience additional medical procedures than at home. Some countries as India, Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand has become the acceptable service-providing pool as they provide surgeries like hip replacements, and sophisticated heart procedures for many of the patients at improved quality and reduced cost of care. Around 55,000 American patients had chosen hospitals in Thailand for better care and treatment in 2005 which had undergone an increase of 30 percent over 2004. India has also seen a 30 percent increase in international patients from 2004 to 2005.

Objective Four: To figure out how large brand sees this stage in consumers buying
behaviour

2.7 Decision Heuristics

A great number of alternative evaluation processes might be used by a consumer within a typical week for a variety of products and services. Thompson et al. (2005) claimed that for each of the product item in the family shopping cart at the supermarket some sort of evaluation was made. On the contrary, consumers have not enough time of willingness to take the time or effort to evaluate every alternative available in the marketplace for most of the purchases they make. It is true for the routine shopping or when looking for unimportant and uninteresting products but they may take time or effort to evaluate every alternative available for high-risk or important purchases. In this case, a range of rules of thumb is seen to be used by consumers to narrow their options, eliminate alternatives and make the best choices that best meet their need. Some of the commonly used decision heuristics are price, brand-reputation, key product signals and market beliefs which are, in other words, mental shortcuts that help consumers reach decisions quickly and efficiently. Shiv and Huber (2000), regarding this, found that the mere-possession concept can influence brand or product choice although it is not a decision heuristic by itself.

2.7.1 Price
Price signals the quality of products to the consumers and who intern becomes willing to pay extra for products or services they perceive are of better quality than the offerings of
15

competitors. Sen and Johnson (1997) added that higher price means higher quality as a rule of thumb in proven to be unreliable as generic drugs similar in content with brand-name product are sold at a lower price.

2.7.2 Brand Reputation

There are few consumers who blindly depend on the brand reputation alone to help them make certain purchase decisions. The power of brand names is apparent if history is properly analyzed. Such a study over 30 product categories revealed that 90 percent of brands had stayed as market leaders from1930 to late 1980s by dint of their brand power. Consumers trust on a particular brand is powerful that consumer, in most cases, take brand reputation as the main sole criterion for evaluation when selecting among several alternatives. Regarding this, Mattila and Wirtz (2001) found that brands that are placed at the top of consumers mind can make more than 50 percent profit compared to that of competitor at the second-place. Brand stretches has an impact on the consumers mind which needs to be addressed as well. A company, say, Marriott International opened its Courtyard as a part of Brand stretching where the company did downward stretches for Fairfield Inn lines which is a lower-quality, lower-priced residence. In such cases, the ownership dimension matters such that owners liking for the parent brand favorably influence the brand line stretches. The effect may not in work for the downward stretches of prestige brands as brand exclusivity is reduced by this in the eyes of the prestige brand owners.

2.7.3 Key Product Signals:

Attractive attributes of products are signaled by some subtle cues that consumers often relied upon. Regarding this, Mattei (2000) described that if the interior and exterior of a car are clean, it may signal to buyer of used-cars that the vehicle is mechanically sound. Missing information is filled up for consumer by product signals. Knowing this, retailers use appalling scents to clothing displays that persuade female customers. Besides, periodically misting water to fresh produce is commonly seen in some supermarkets to add a freshness cue for the shopper.

16

2.7.4 Market Beliefs:

Some common assumptions or generalizations are used by consumers regarding the way it operates that simplify their purchase decisions. Regarding this, Louviere et al. (2000) added that such market assumptions are used as convenient shortcuts for consumers for evaluating alternatives.

2.7.5 Mere-Possession
From several studies, it has been revealed that mere-possession which is simply possessing a brand of a product or service may cause consumers to prefer a brand or product over other. Lindquist et al., (2000) termed consumers taking instantaneous possession as an arbitrary conclusion of the consumer. A study over a set of rest restaurant choices by consumers revealed that merely possessing coupons by consumers of a specific restaurant influenced them to go to that restaurant again.

2.8 Conclusion
In this chapter, the opinions of several authors were critically analyzed and evaluated. The researcher has considered both the opinions in support and against to understand the fact. Marketers can attempt to influence the final purchase decision by utilizing opportunities provided by alternative evaluation, the third stage in the consumer decision-making process. Regarding this, Laroche et al. (2003) mentioned that consumers first chose to a product category and then move toward selecting a specific brand or retail outlet during the evaluation of alternatives. Consumers are particularly convinced by the messages provided by marketers to them to narrow their options in this stage. The extent of assistance required by consumers from marketers depends on the extent to which their purchases are planned or unplanned. In the next chapter, the researcher will design the methodology for the research.

17

Chapter 03: Research Methodology

18

3.0 Introduction Research, in simple words, is the search for knowledge that uses systematic and scientific methods for searching relevant information to infer effective decision. Thomas (2003) described it as an artistic use of scientific investigation to discover a fact. He also added that research discovers new facts in numerous branches of knowledge through careful inquiry and investigation. Regarding this Webb (1992) mentioned that research is a movement from known to the unknown that explore new branches of knowledge deploying systematic efforts. Naturally, human mind tries to discover unknown whenever it confronts ambiguity. In a word, the research can be termed as a continuous voyage of discovery. It is well understood that knowledge comes from inquisitiveness that removes the obstacles of ignorance from human mind. 3.1 Research Philosophy The researcher used positivism type of retrench philosophy. According to Garbarino and Edell (1997), positivism research paradigm explains the subject area for forecasting the topic by using the structure of the causal laws. It also explains that a reality is a greater need for the success of the research. This philosophy also believes that facts should be examined in an independent way whereas the observations are to be made in order to ensure efficiency and effectiveness of the research. Laroche et al., (2003) found that the research philosophy has direct impact on the research; therefore, it is too much vital for conducting a study. 3.2 Research Approaches From the above discussion it is pretty clear that two commonly used research approaches are qualitative and quantitative research approach. The qualitative research approach is used for creating and generating data in a way that can be further used for a quantitative analysis in a formal and structured fusion. Several other branches of this approach are also used for diverse research purposes. In words of Saunders et al., (2007) three of such branches of qualitative research are inferential, experimental and simulation research approaches. Inferential research approach is used to form a common data base that help inferring relationships of target population. Moreover, experimental research approach is used for achieving maximum control over the research environment as well as manipulating few variables to check how one variable affect other. Again, simulation research approach is used

19

for the purpose of constructing simulated environment within which accurate and relevant information can be generated. Qualitative research approach is used for assessing attitudes, opinions and behaviours subjectively that is influenced by a researchers insights, intuition and personal assessment. Saunders et al., (2009) found that qualitative research produces results that are in qualitative form and cannot be subjected to any quantitative analysis. Some commonly used techniques for qualitative research are focus group interviews, projective techniques and depth interviews. In this project, the researcher used deductive research approach because it best suits the research aim and objectives.

3.3 Research Strategy

Figure 1: Research Strategy

Source: Cohen and Manion (1994)

Several types of reserch strategies are seen to be used, for example, surveys, action research, ethnography, modelling operational research, case studies and so on. The researcher would like to follow the questionnair survey method based on the nature of aim and objectives. The researcher will also have some in-depth interviews with the managers and employees of Pizza hut to collect some primary data.

20

3.4 Research choice

Several types of research are used to complement the specific research objective. Silverman (2010) compared and contrasted some of the basic research types 3.1.1 Descriptive versus Analytical Research: Descriptive research involves different enquiries regarding fact-finding as well as surveys to explain a current state of affairs. Contrary to this, analytical research involves analysis of available information and critically evaluating them. 3.1.2 Applied versus Fundamental Research: Applied research is used to discover a solution for a problem at hand that is faced by an organization or any other parties. On the other hand, fundamental research is used to generalize and formulate theories to solve research problems. 3.1.3 Qualitative versus Quantitative Research: Quantitative research is used to measure the quantity or amount of a phenomenon that can be expressed in terms of quantity. On the other hand, qualitative research involves phenomena that are concerned with quality of kind. 3.1.4 Conceptual versus Empirical: Conceptual research is concerned with abstract ideas or theories and is used to generate new concepts and theories or to redefine existing ones. On the other hand, empirical research is concerned with experience or observation only and often seen to ignore theories and systems. the short description above dictates that this project should undertake a descriptive research to conduct the research as it best complement the research purpose and objectives. In this researcher has used quantitative research approach. For collecting quantitative data, the researcher used questionnaire survey and to analyze the collected data SPSS and spreadsheets were used.

21

3.5 Data collection To solve a research problem there is always a deficiency of relevant data which is approved by many of the researchers. Therefore, a researchers needs to collect data from several sources using various ways of collecting data. Cohen and Manion (1994) mentioned the researcher uses several ways to collect data for a particular research problem and which way of collecting data will be used is determined by the costs, time, money and other resources that are related with conducting the research. For collecting primary data both experiment and survey methods are suitable. Regarding this, Cameron and Price (2009) found that some quantitative measurements are observed by the researchers while conducting an experiment that examines the facts contained in a research hypotheses. On the other hand, several related methods can be used for collecting data based on the information need of research and nature of the data. Some of the suitable data collecting methods are, for example, observation personal interview, telephone interview, mailing questionnaires and through schedules. To select any of the above motioned data collecting methods the researcher needs to consider some factors as type of investigation, purpose to the investigation, availability of financial resources, time limitations and expected degree of accuracy. In his words, Bryman (2008) mentioned that the researcher can use his/her depth of knowledge to choose among above mentioned data collecting methods. Again, Bryman and Bell (2003) opined that to conduct a research, the researchers common sence is a basic essentials and the researchers acquired experince can be comparable with the prime instructor regarding collecitng statistical data. To collect the primary data, the resercher will use questinnair survey. The respondents would be selected using the customer database of Pizza hut. Some of the managers and employees of the Pizza hut will also be interviewed. For secondary reserch, the resercher will use different published articles and journales ralated to customer buying behavior. 3.6 Data analysis: The analysis part of a research starts soon after necessary data a collected adequately maintaining a proper way. Data analysis involves some closely related operations, such as establishing categories, coding data and applying data codes to raw data, tabulation and drawing inferences based on statistics. Some data are less common and thus does not conform to reliability criteria. Such data should be categorized under some manageable groups and tables to assist further analysis. Hence, raw data are often grouped under few
22

manageable and usable categories. Regarding this, Bryman and Bell (2007) found that coding facilitate categorizing and transforming data into sybols to make countable, hence suitable for the analysis stage. On the other hand, editing assists in upgrading the data quality to make it appropriate for coding that further help the tabulation tasks. The tabulation task is a part of technical procedures that assist putting classified data into tables. Several mechanical devises are used to tabulate in a great number more easily and efficiently. Use of statistical software help study a large number of variables relating a research proble within a few miniutes and at a lesser cost. Soon after the tabulation task, a researcher starts analyzing data to make inferences. The researchers analyze the data by computing various percentages and coefficients and with the help of various well structured statistical formulas. Regarding this, Brew (2001) claimed that the analysis part of the research should include drawing conclusions by evaluating relationships and differences, by supporting and conflicting with original new hypotheses. The writer also mentioned that statistical tests are mandatory because they examine and establish a statistical deviation is the outcome of random fluctuations or a real one. If the statistical tests reveal that the difference is a real one then the inference should be that the two samples do not belong to the same universe. Contrary to this, it the tests suggest that the difference is the result of a chance the inference should be the two samples belong to the same universe. The statistical tools should be widely used to help the analysis part of the research and to collect data. The refresher will use SPSS. Frequency tables and chi-square tests will also be used to get numerical output of the research data.

3.7 Validity of the research

One important task of the researcher is to make the research valid and reliable to the readers by keeping it simple and straight forward. The reliability measures how correct and appropriate the research work is. The validity of the research is ensured by the reliability aspects of the research. In the words of Mattila and Wirtz (2001) the validity and the reliability of a research is determined by the authenticity of collected information, and methods of analysis, use of reliable source. Therefore, the researcher guarantees the validity of data sources used in the research. The researcher also assures that all the data used in this

23

project is collected from authentic sources and unacknowledged sources of data were totally avoided. Finally, the researcher assures that primary and secondary data used in this research is meaningful, logical and reliable.

3.8 Research Ethics

Ethical issues needs to be carefully considered while conducting a research. Therefore, ensuring the ethical position of the study is mandatory. Moreover, the researcher needs to be aware of the fact that the research should not negatively impact the respondents, environment and the society at large (Sippel, 1997). A researcher does not have the legal right to force respondents to provide information or persuade him to respond in a certain way. Moreover, the respondents should be allowed to keep their personal information secret. However, in this study, the respondents were informed about their rights during the interviews and survey. The researcher strictly followed the rules and regulations set by the University of Huddersfield regarding research ethics to make the findings authentic and reliable. finally, following the proper ethical guiltiness creates a strong ethical position for the researcher to complete this study.

3.9 Limitations for this study

No research is beyond limitations and shortcomings, for example, ensuring reliability and validity toward the readers is difficult in qualitative research. The researcher must confess the limitations of the study, if there is any. Some of the research limitations in this research are as follows: The researcher used a small simple size which may result in different outcomes if the sample size is increased The more knowledge about SPSS operations would simplify the findings Quantitative information is not representative all the time In survey method, respondents are often indirectly forced to respond

24

Although, some limitations regarding time, budget, geographical location and availability of data were apparent, the research sincerely and accurately tried to avoid all sorts of shortcoming from the study.

3.7 Conclusion
Planning and designing a research work is the most difficult and most important task for a researcher before conducting a research. Defining the research problem is equally important with developing the research design that complement completing the other parts of the research. A well development of research design and wisely adopted research process determine the success of a research project. Moreover, effective outcome of a research is dependent on the well designed data collection procedures and data analysis techniques. However, it is common for a researcher to face limitation of time, money, information and other resources while conducting a research work. Hence, the researcher should ensure the best use of available resources to produce successful research results. In the following chapter, the researcher will discuss the results of the study and analysis.

25

Chapter 4: Result and Analysis

26

4.0 Introduction:

The researcher, in this part of the project, has accumulated results from the questionnaire and analyzed them using relevant techniques and intuition. The empirical work only considered the case study of Amazon to complete the project where a complete analysis of qualitative and quantitative data was aptly presented to create results. To conduct the primary research, the researcher had to take help of questionnaires in collecting data that were further analyzed by spreadsheets, graphs and charts. The profiles of the Pizza huts customers responded to the questionnaire has been examined and aptly presented in the first part of this chapter whereas the second part of the chapter examined and analyzed the findings based on the selected hypotheses.

4.1 Profile of the participants

Profiles of the Pizza huts customers who completed the questionnaires have been examined and analyzed in this part of the chapter. 50 customers who regularly buy from Pizza hut were given a questionnaire for each in a random basis. The respondents were asked questions regarding whether the evaluation of alternative is the most important stage of while purchasing in case of Amazon. However, the researcher initially selected 30 respondents who were given two-copies of the questioner who in turn completed one for themselves and distributed another to their friends or acquaintance. Therefore, the task of selecting the respondents were made easier and the sample size was easily expanded that produced more realistic results. The researcher found 60 questionnaires filled by using the snowballing method where 10 questionnaires were inaccurately completed unfortunately; therefore, the researcher had to be satisfied with a sample size of 50.

4.2 Frequency Table Analysis

Based on the frequency tables presented in the Appendix 2, the research has analyzed the findings of the frequency table in this part of the study.

27

At first the researcher wanted to know wheatear the evaluation of alternatives is important to the respondents or not. The highest 52% of respondents said evaluation of alternative stage is highly

important for them. As the evaluation of alternative is highly important for consumers, Pizza hut needs to set strategies so that customers always find it as the best alternative. While asked about whether the customers skip the evaluation of alternative stage, the highest 52% of the respondents said they do not skip. Therefore, Pizza hut have the ground to invest in persuading customers at the evaluation of alternatives. After being asked about the factors the respondents consider the most for evaluation of
alternatives, 46% of respondents said they value color, brand, price and style while evaluating

alternatives. Therefore, Pizza hut must pay close attention to upgrade those attributes. When the researcher asked about the aspects of Pizza huts offering that make it superior to the
respondents than other brands, the highest 38% of respondents said they find Pizza hut superior

to other brands due to quality and brand name. Therefore, Pizza hut may focus on those key criteria to improve. Being asked about whether they find available alternatives for the offerings of Pizza hut, the
highest 54% of the respondents said they do not find. However, the rest percentage of customers did find. Therefore, to be market leader, Pizza hut must not spare half the market.

While asked about whether Pizza huts offerings match the respondents expectations, the highest 32% of respondents voted that the offerings of Pizza hut match their expectations. The percentage can be increased if Pizza hut offer customized products. Being asked about whether the customers judge different product offerings with the same yard
stick, the highest 34% of the respondents said they do not. Therefore, the product offering

must be differentiated. While asked about why the respondents prefer most while buying from Pizza hut, the highest 42% of respondents voted that they prefer buying from Pizza hut due to favorable environment and hygiene. Therefore, to maintain a loyal customer base, Pizza hut must continue these services. The researcher wanted to know about whether matching the product offerings with consumer
usage situation best attracts customers, the highest 46% of respondents voted that they strongly

28

agree with the above statement. Therefore, Pizza hut should offer product that best match the customer expectation. While asked about weather evaluation of alternatives is the best way to find a desired product, the
highest 45% of the respondents said yes. Therefore, Pizza hut should apply strategies that help keep them up in the evaluation stage.

The researcher asked about wheatear the respondents have preoccupied evaluation about the brands, the highest 42% of respondents voted that they do not have preoccupied evaluation regarding any specific brand. Therefore, Pizza hut should pre-occupy the customer mind. When asked about whether the customers follow any evaluative criteria to choose a brand, the
highest 65% of the respondents said yes. Therefore, Pizza hut should understand what evaluative criteria are used by customs while selecting a brand.

4.3 Chi Square analysis

Chi-square analysis was performed by the researcher by descriptive statistics to test the hypothesis. All the results of the chi-square test are available in the appendix-3. Attribute 1: assessing the evaluation of alternatives stage from organizations and consumers perspectives Null Hypothesis: Evaluation of alternatives is the most important stage in consumer buying behavior Alternative hypothesis: Evaluation of alternatives is not the most important stage in consumer buying behavior Level of significance: 0.05 Test Statistics:

Q1 Chi-Square Df
7.846(a)

Q2
11.787(a)

Q3
.48(a)

Q4
7.110(a)

4
29

Asymp. Sig.

.322

.705

.754

. 933

a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5. The minimum expected cell frequency is 5.5. Result: significance p<0.05, the null hypothesis has been rejected. The average of the significance value of the 4 questions is 0.59 which is greater than .5. Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted. From this analysis, the researcher has found that percentage of the respondents who think that evaluation of alternatives is the most important stage in consumer buying behaviour high in number. Therefore, the suggestion for Pizza hut is to set strategies to keep themselves up in the customer mind. Attribute 2: Understanding what criteria makes Pizza hut distinctive in evaluation of alternatives stage Null Hypothesis: Customer service and store experience make Pizza hut distinctive Alternative hypothesis: Customer service and store experience do not make Pizza hut distinctive Level of significance: 0.05

30

Test Statistics:

Q5 Chi-Square Df Asymp. Sig.

9.826(a)

Q6
5.347(a)

Q7
12.48(a)

Q8
8.110(a)

2 .458

4 .967

8 .678

4 . 766

a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5. The minimum expected cell frequency is 5.5. Result: significance p<0.05, the null hypothesis has been rejected. The average of the significance value of the 4 questions is 0.70 which is greater than .5. Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted. From this analysis, the researcher has found that percentage of the respondents who think that Customer service and store experience make Pizza hut distinctive are high in number. Therefore, Pizza hut should keep focused on continuing improved service and unique store experiences to retain existing customers. Attribute 3: Understanding how consumer buying decisions work Null Hypothesis: Choice of brand remains preoccupied in the customer mind Alternative hypothesis: Choice of brand does not remain preoccupied in the customer mind Level of significance: 0.05 Test Statistics:

Q5 Chi-Square
5.846(a)

Q6
6.344(a)

Q7
11.18(a)

Q8
5.118(a)

31

Df Asymp. Sig.

4 .565

4 .653

8 .988

8 .321

a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5. The minimum expected cell frequency is 5.5. Result: significance p<0.05, the null hypothesis has been rejected. The average of the significance value of the 4 questions is 0.63 which is greater than .5. Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted. From this analysis, the researcher has found that percentage of the respondents who think that choice of brand remains preoccupied in the customer mind is high. Therefore, pizza hut needs to work on brand positioning so that they can stay alive always in customer mind. Attribute 3: Knowing what consumers evaluate in this stage to make decision Null Hypothesis: Consumes evaluate price, quality and service to make decision Alternative hypothesis: Consumes do not evaluate price, quality and service to make decision Level of significance: 0.05 Test Statistics:

Q9 Chi-Square Df Asymp. Sig.

9.846(a)

Q10
5.344(a)

Q11
6.18(a)

Q12
8.119(a)

4 .476

2 .363

2 .748

4 .652

a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5. The minimum expected cell frequency is 5.5. Result: significance p<0.05, the null hypothesis has been rejected.

32

The average of the significance value of the 4 questions is 0.56 which is greater than .5. Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted. From this analysis, the researcher has found that percentage of the respondents who think that Consumes evaluate price, quality and service to make decision is higher. Therefore, Pizza hut must focus on these three aspects as price, quality and service for their sustainable development.

4.4 Conclusion
Qualitative and quantitative data have been aptly analyzed and evaluated in this chapter. All the predefined hypotheses have been testified and justified with the opinions of the authors. The responses of the respondents have been analyzed by using graphs and charts to verify the hypotheses. This part of the project has so far established that evaluation of alternative is the most essential stage for consumers that can be skipped in certain instances. Evaluation of alternatives ensures satisfied and loyal base of customers. Although, evolution of alternative is seen differently by customers and organizations, this stage carries high importance in the customer buying decision making. The following chapter will present recommendations and an overall conclusion of the project.

33

Analysis and discussion

4.5 Introduction
The main objective of this chapter is to testify predefined hypothec and determine whether they are valid or not and if valid to what extent. This chapter also tries fine the relation between the predefined hypotheses and the objectives of the project. If examines to what extent the hypotheses complement the objectives of the project. Information gathered from the questionnaire and in-depth interview are accumulated in this chapter for comparison and the findings are compared with the literature review. The first objective of this project was to assess the evaluation of alternatives stage from organizations and consumers perspectives. Although evolution of alternative stage can be skipped by the consumers as customers are naturally impulsive this is found in the literature of Baseman, M., (2001). 5.1.1 Hypothesis 1 The first hypothesis in this project was that Evaluation of Alternatives is highly important for
customers in purchasing a product.

The questioner analysis in this project disclosed that 52% of the respondents vote that alternative evaluation is highly important which is complementary to the literature of Chao, P. (2001). The second objective was to understand what criteria make Pizza hut distinctive in evaluation of alternatives stage. From the literature of Campbell, M. C. (1999), it is evident that a brand can be distinctive for several reasons as price, quality, distribution, style, color and so on. 5.2.1 Hypothesis 2 and 3

34

The second and third hypotheses was respectively Consumers consider factors as style, color,
brand and price the most for evaluation of alternatives and Quality and brand name make Pizza huts offering superior to other brands.

hypotheses 02 was found valid as 46% of the respondents claimed that they prefer style, color, brand and price as the core consideration to evaluate a product which is complementary to the literature of Bone, P. and France, K. (2001). Again, for the hypothesis 03, 38% of the respondents voted for the quality and brand name as the prime reasons for choosing Pizza hut that justified the validity of hypothesis which is further complemented by the literature of Blair et al., (2002). The third objective of this project was understand how consumer buying decisions work. Bazerman, M., (2001) opined that understanding consumer buying behaviors in a difficult task but they often follow a series of steps to make a buying decision. 5.3.1 Hypothesis 4 and 5 The fourth and fifth hypothesis in this project were Pizza huts offerings matches with the most customers expectations and Environment and hygiene are the factors that are most
preferred by customers who buy from Pizza hut.

Responses to questionnaire provide evidences for the validity of the hypothec 4 and 5. 32% of the respondents claimed that Pizza huts offerings matches their expectations, therefore the hypothesis is valid. Again, 42% of the respondents found that environment and hygiene are the prime reasons behind buying from Pizza hut. Hereby, the hypothesis is also valid. The fourth objective of the project was to know what consumers evaluate in this stage to make decision. From the literature review of Arnold, M. J. and Reynolds, K. E. (2003), it is found that customers may evaluate price, quality, distribution, style, packaging, color and so on in the evaluation of alternative stage. 5.4.1 Hypothesis 6 and 7

35

The sixth and seventh hypotheses in this project were Customers are best attracted when the product offerings match with consumer usage situation and Consumers have preoccupied evaluation about the brands. The sixth hypothesis was found valid as 46% of the respondents supported the statement where as seventh hypothesis was invalid as 42% of the respondents disagreed to the statement. The fourth objective is, however, fulfilled by the sixth and seventh hypotheses and complementary to the findings of Bone, P. and France, K. (2001) and Campbell, M. C. (1999).

4.6 Chapter Summary

From the above discussion, the research objectives are clearly met. The first objective was to assess the evaluation of alternatives stage from organizations and consumers perspectives. By this assessment, the researcher has found that customers highly prioritize this stage while organizations respond in this stage by brand positioning. The second objective was to understand what criteria make Pizza hut distinctive in evaluation of alternatives stage. The findings show that the price, quality and service make it distinctive. The third objective was to understand how consumer buying decisions work. The findings show that consumer mind remain pre-occupied with the brand they like. The fourth objective was to know what consumers evaluate in this stage to make decision. The findings show that consumers evaluate price, quality and service in this stage to make purchase decision.

36

Chapter Five: Conclusions and Recommendations

37

5.0 Introduction
This study has aptly disclosed some inferences that best answers how important are evolution of alternative stage for a consumer and for organizations. Consumers, in some cases, skip the evaluation of alternative stage because of their impulsive nature. Moreover, evaluation of alternative facilitates creating satisfied and loyal customer base. Several authors have assured that there is no absolute rule available for deterring the consumer behavior but average customers follow a sequential stage to make buying decisions. Customers proffered Pizza hut because of their differentiated offerings, price quality combinations and discounts. Customers were found to use some criteria to evaluate alternatives, for example, price, quality, variations and so on from this study.

5.1 Recommendations
The analysis of customers responses revealed that Pizza huts customer services require further improvement and a good rapport with the customers is yet to establish strongly. A positive attitude needs to be planted into the mind of employees in Pizza hut as it is well know that a good attitude is as contagious as bad attitude. Increasing coupons: coupons are the Pizza huts best weapons to attract customers. Most cutworms are more than crazy to get the coupons of Pizza hut. Online ordering: online services of Pizza Hut requires further improvements as more customers still complain regarding the ordering process, transaction and delivery. Ensure quick delivery of services: to retain the existing base of customers and make a loyal base, Pizza hut needs to ensure quick and quality services to their customers as more customers blame them for being so laggard. Bigger interior: Pizza huts interiors are often small and crowed, therefore it needs to ensure bigger interior to provide better services and experiences to customers. Online delivery charges: Pizza hut should have a uniform delivery charge based on the locations rather than different charges for different branches of the Pizza hut. However, Pizza hut needs to keep a close eye on what attributes customers are evaluating their offerings, otherwise they may fail to understand customers expectations as it changes
38

frequently. Pizza Hut needs to be more interactive with their customers so that it may stand as the best alternative in the minds of its customers.

5.2 Conclusion
In chapter one, the researcher discussed about the research background, significance, rational of the research followed by research aim and objectives. The research question was also included in this chapter. Motivating for choosing this subject area and an structure of the research were also presented in this chapter. The research also mentioned the size of the Pizza huts market and their success factors.
In chapter two, the researcher has analyzed and evaluated the opinions of several authors to reach a decision. The opinions in support and against were compared and contrasted to understand the fact. The chapter provided a basic idea about the research problem. This chapter mainly included those opinions of several authors from published journals or articles. In chapter three, the researcher worked out the research approach and strategy. This chapter was used as a blueprint for the study. The researcher used positivism research philosophy and deductive research approach because they seemed to match the aim and objectives of the research. Besides, the researcher used survey as the research strategy and quantitative research as the research choice. Collected data were analyzed by using spreadsheets and SPSS. Frequency tables and chi-square tests were also used to analyze the data. Research ethics, validity and limitations were discussed in this chapter. In chapter four, the researcher used frequency table analysis and chi-square test to analyze and interpret data. The hypotheses were tested through the chi-square test. In the discussion part, the research objective were matched with the findings from literature review to check whiter the research objectives are met. In chapter five, the researcher placed some recommendations for the Pizza hut to utilize the alternative of evaluation stage for their benefit. Some of the recommendations were i ncreasing

coupons, online ordering, ensure quick delivery of services, bigger interior, reducing online delivery charges and so on.

39

References
Ariely, D. (2000) Controlling the Information Flow: Effects on Consumers Decisionmaking and Preferences, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 27, pp. 45-49. Arndt, J., and Greenberg , J. (1999), The Effects of A Self-Esteem Boost and Mortality Salience on Responses to Boost Relevant and Irrelevant Worldview Threats, Personality and Social psychology Bulletin, Vol. 25, pp. 31-35. Arnold, M. J. and Reynolds, K. E. (2003), Hedonic Shopping Motivations, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 79, No. 2, pp. 7795. Baumeister, R., and Leary, M. (1995), The Need to Belong: Desire for Interpersonal Attachments As A Fundamental Human Motivation, Psychological Bulletin, vol. 117 (May), 43-49 Bazerman, M., (2001) Consumer Research for Consumers, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol 27, pp. 33-34. Blackwell, R., Miniard, P. and Engel (2001), Consumer behavior:. Ohio: South-Western, The Dryden press Blair, E. A., Harris, J., and Monroe, K. B. (2002), Effects of Shopping Information on Consumers Response to Comparative Price Claims, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 78, No.3, pp. 175182. Bone, P. and France, K. (2001) Package Graphics and Consumer Product Beliefs, Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 15, No. (3), pp. 467. Brew, A. (2001). Conceptions of research: A phenomenographic study. Studies in Higher Education, 26(3), 271285 Brewer, M., and Weber, J. (1994), Self-Evaluation Effects of Interpersonal Versus Intergroup Social Comparison, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 66, pp. 65-69 Bryman A. and Bell E. (2003) Business Research methods. Oxford : Oxford University Press.

40

Bryman A. and Bell E. M. (2007) Business Research Methods. New York : Oxford University Press. 2nd Edn, 2007 Bryman, A. (2008) Social Research Methods, Oxford: Oxford University Buss, D.M. (1991), Evolutionary Personality Psychology, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 42. No. 1, pp. 59-71. Cameron, S. and Price, D. (2009) Business Research Methods: a practical approach, Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, London Campbell, M. C. (1999), Perceptions of Price Unfairness: Antecedents and Consequences, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 36, pp. 187199. Chao, P. (2001), The Moderating Effects of Country of Assembly, Country of Parts, and Country of Design on Hybrid Product Evaluations, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 30, pp. 67 81. Cohen. L. and Manion. L. (1994) Research methods in education, (4th Edn) London. Routledge/ Falmer press Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (2000) The discipline and practice of qualitative research In Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S., (eds)Handbook of Qualitative research 2nd Edition, London: Sage Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., and Grewal, D. (1991), Effects of Price, Brand and Store Information on Buyers Product Evaluations, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 28, pp. 307319. Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., and Grewal, D. (1991), Effects of Price, Brand and Store Information on Buyers Product Evaluations, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 28, pp. 307319. Donald, R. F.; de Ponte, M.; Groz, M. J. P.; Taylor, R. (2003). Status, ecology, behaviour and conservation of Raso Lark Alauda razae. Bird Conservation International Vol. 13, PP> 1328. Drakopoulos, S.A. (2008), The paradox of happiness: towards an alternative explanation, Journal of Happiness Studies, Volume 9, No. 2, pp. 102-106
41

Easterby-Smith M., Richard, T. and Andy, L. (1991) Management Research:An Introduction. London : Sage Publications Ltd. Evans, M. (2001),Consumer Behavior towards Fashion, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 23, pp. 7-9 Flatters, P., Willmott, M. (2009), Understanding the post recession consumer, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 7, no. (8), pp. 33- 35 Garbarino, E. C. and Edell, J. A. (1997), Cognitive Effort, Affect and Choice, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 24, pp. 147158. Ghauri, P., Grnhaug, K. and Kristianslund, I., (1995), Research Methods in Business Studies: A Practical Guide, Prentice Hall, Hemel Hempstead Glowa, T. and Lawson, S. (2000). Discrete choice experiments and traditional conjoint analysis, Quirks Marketing Research Review. Grewal, D., Baker, J., Levy, M., and Voss, G. B. (2003), The Effects of Wait Expectations and Store Atmosphere Evaluations on Patronage Intentions in Service-Intensive Retail Stores, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 79, No. 4, pp. 259268. Grewal, D., Monroe, K. B., and Krishnan, R. (1998), The Effects of Price-Comparison Advertising on Buyers Perceptions of Acquisition Value, Transaction Value, and Behavioral Intentions, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62, pp. 4659. Hogg, M. K., Bruce, M. and Hill, A. J. (1998), Fashion brand preference among young consumers, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management; Vol. 26, no 8, pp 23-233 Hoyer, W. D., Maclnnis, D. J. (2004), Consumer behavior, (3rd ed.), Houghton Mifflin company Kar, M. (2010), Consumer behavior over the last 25 years, Oxirm Research Themes, Oxford Institute of Retail Management, The Retail Digest, pp 56-59 Kardes, F. R., Kalyanaram, G., Chandreshekaran, M., and Dornoff, R. J. (1993), Brand Retrieval, Consideration Set Composition, Consumer Choice, and the Pioneering Advantage, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20, pp. 6275.
42

Laroche, M., Kim, C., and Matsui, T. (2003), Which Decision Heuristics Are Used in Consideration Set Formation, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 192209. Lewis, D., Bridger, D. (2000), The Soul of the New Consumer: Authenticity What We Buy and Why in the New Economy, Nicholas Brealey Publishing, London Hawkins, D. and Best, R. K. C., (1989). Consumer Behavior: Implications for Marketing Strategy, Fourth Edition, BPI-Irwin, Homewood, IL, pp. 66-69. Lindquist, J. D., Keep, W. W., and Dahlstrom, R. W. (2000), Consumer Shopping Process Benefits: Shopping Centers Versus Catalogs, Marketing Management Journal, Vol. 10, pp. 131141. Louviere, J. J., Hensher, D. and Swait, J. (2000) Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Application, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, pp. 23-24. Mandel, N., Petrova, P. K and Cialdini, R. B. (2006), Images of Success and the Preference for Luxury Brands, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 76-79. Mattei, A., (2000) Full scale real tests of consumer behaviour using experimental data, Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization, Vol. 43, No. (4), pp. 44-49. Mattila, A. S. and Wirtz, J. (2001), Congruency of Scent and Music as a Driver of In -store Evaluations and Behavior, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 77, No. 2, pp. 273299. Paul, P. J., Olson J. C., Grunert K. G. (1999), Consumer behavior and Marketing strategy, McGraw Hill Petrova, P., and Cialdini, R. (2005), Fluency of Consumption Imagery and the Backfire Effects of Imagery Appeals, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 32, pp. 42-45. Richins, M. (1991), Social Comparison and the Idealized Images of Advertising, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 19, pp. 79-83. Rowley, J. (1997), Focusing on Customers, Library Review, Vol. 46, No.2, pp. 56-59 Saunders M., Lewis P. and Thornhill A.,(2009)Research Methods for Business Students,Pearson Education ltd.,5th Edition, Great Britain.

43

Saunders, M.K, Lewis P. and Thornhill, A. (2007) Research Methods for Business Students, (4th edn) Essex: Pearson Education Limited Sen, S. and Johnson, E. J. (1997), Mere-Possession Effects without Possession in Consumer Choice, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 24, pp. 105117. Shiffman, G.L. and Kanuk, L.L, (2000). Consumer Behaviour (7th Edition), Upper Saddle River, NH: Prentice Hall, pp. 390-399. Shiv, B. and Huber, J. (2000). The Impact of Anticipating Satisfaction on Consumer Choice, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 27, pp. 98-99.
Silverman, D. (2010) Doing Qualitative Research, 3rd. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Sippel, R., (1997). An Experiment on the Pure Theory of Consumers Behaviour, The Economic Journal, Vol. 107, pp. 1431-1444.
Thomas, R.M. (2003) Blending Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods in Thesis and Dissertations, Corwin Press, Inc, a Sage Publications Company

Thompson, D. V., Hamilton, R. W., and Rust, R. T. (2005), Feature Fatigue: When Product Capabilities Become Too Much of a Good Thing, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 42, pp. 431442. Walker, B. and Olsen, J. (1997) The Activated Self in Consumer Behavior: A Cognitive Structure Perspective, Research in Consumer Behavior, Vol. 8, pp. 135-171. Webb, J., (1992), Understanding and & Designing Marketing Research. The Dryden Press, London. Zhang, S. and Sood, S. (2002), Deep and Surface Cues: Brand Extension Evaluation by Children and Adults, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 29, pp. 129141.

44

Appendices
Appendix 1
Table 1: Age distribution
Sex/Age range 18-30 31-40 40-50 51+

Male Female

9 2

12 11

10 6

Appendix 2

Frequencies
Notes

Output Created Comments Input Data

17-APR-2013 14:32:21

E:\Downloads\mv\rango\SPSS\two\Pizza Hut\spss\PizzaHut_thesis.sav

Filter Weight Split File N of Rows in Working Data File Missing Value Handling Cases Used Definition of Missing

<none> <none> <none> 50 User-defined missing values are treated as missing. Statistics are based on all cases with valid data.

Syntax

FREQUENCIES VARIABLES=Distribution_of_Gender Age_Distribution Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 /STATISTICS=STDDEV MEAN /PIECHART FREQ /ORDER= ANALYSIS .

Resources

Elapsed Time Total Values Allowed

0:00:00.22 149796

Statistics 45

Distribution_of_ Gender N Valid Missing Mean Std. Deviation 50 0 1.38 .490

Age_Distributi on 50 0 3.10 .735 Q1 50 0 1.94 1.268 Q2 50 0 2.04 1.029 Q3 50 0 3.60 1.578 Q4 50 0 3.32 1.584

Frequency Table
Distribution_of_Gender

Cumulative Frequency Valid Male Female Total 31 19 50 Percent 62.0 38.0 100.0 Valid Percent 62.0 38.0 100.0 Percent 62.0 100.0

Age_Distribution

Cumulative Frequency Valid 16-20 21-25 26-30 Total 11 23 16 50 Percent 22.0 46.0 32.0 100.0 Valid Percent 22.0 46.0 32.0 100.0 Percent 22.0 68.0 100.0

Q1

Cumulative Frequency Valid Highly Important Important Neutral Do not bother Not Important Total 26 12 5 3 4 50 Percent 52.0 24.0 10.0 6.0 8.0 100.0 Valid Percent 52.0 24.0 10.0 6.0 8.0 100.0 Percent 52.0 76.0 86.0 92.0 100.0

46

Q2

Cumulative Frequency Valid Yes No Often Sometimes Total 21 10 15 4 50 Percent 42.0 20.0 30.0 8.0 100.0 Valid Percent 42.0 20.0 30.0 8.0 100.0 Percent 42.0 62.0 92.0 100.0

Q3

Cumulative Frequency Valid Style Colour Brand Price All Total 9 5 6 7 23 50 Percent 18.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 46.0 100.0 Valid Percent 18.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 46.0 100.0 Percent 18.0 28.0 40.0 54.0 100.0

Q4

Cumulative Frequency Valid Price Quality Brand Name Taste Quality and Brand Name Total 10 7 9 5 19 50 Percent 20.0 14.0 18.0 10.0 38.0 100.0 Valid Percent 20.0 14.0 18.0 10.0 38.0 100.0 Percent 20.0 34.0 52.0 62.0 100.0

Q5

Cumulative Frequency Valid Yes, Often I do 13 12 Percent 26.0 24.0 Valid Percent 26.0 24.0 Percent 26.0 50.0

47

sometimes No Total 25 50 50.0 100.0 50.0 100.0 100.0

Q6

Cumulative Frequency Valid Yes No In some cases In most cases Total 16 14 10 Percent 32.0 28.0 20.0 Valid Percent 32.0 28.0 20.0 Percent 32.0 60.0 80.0

10 50

20.0 100.0

20.0 100.0

100.0

Q7

Cumulative Frequency Valid Yes No In some cases In most cases Total 16 24 5 Percent 32.0 48.0 10.0 Valid Percent 32.0 48.0 10.0 Percent 32.0 80.0 90.0

5 50

10.0 100.0

10.0 100.0

100.0

Q8

Cumulative Frequency Valid Environment Hygiene Brand Price Environment and Hygiene Total 7 4 6 12 21 50 Percent 14.0 8.0 12.0 24.0 42.0 100.0 Valid Percent 14.0 8.0 12.0 24.0 42.0 100.0 Percent 14.0 22.0 34.0 58.0 100.0

48

Q9

Cumulative Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Neither agree or disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Total 22 10 5 11 2 50 Percent 44.0 20.0 10.0 22.0 4.0 100.0 Valid Percent 44.0 20.0 10.0 22.0 4.0 100.0 Percent 44.0 64.0 74.0 96.0 100.0

Q10

Cumulative Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Neither agree or disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Total 25 15 3 5 2 50 Percent 50.0 30.0 6.0 10.0 4.0 100.0 Valid Percent 50.0 30.0 6.0 10.0 4.0 100.0 Percent 50.0 80.0 86.0 96.0 100.0

Q11

Cumulative Frequency Valid No In some cases In most cases Total 21 19 Percent 42.0 38.0 Valid Percent 42.0 38.0 Percent 42.0 80.0

10 50

20.0 100.0

20.0 100.0

100.0

Q12

Cumulative Frequency Valid No 29 Percent 58.0 Valid Percent 58.0 Percent 58.0

49

In some cases In most cases Total

12.0

12.0

70.0

15 50

30.0 100.0

30.0 100.0

100.0

Pie Chart

Distribution_of_Gender

Male Female

50

Age_Distribution

16-20 21-25 26-30

Q1

Highly Important Important Neutral Do not bother Not Important

51

Q2

Yes No Often Sometimes

Q3

Style Colour Brand Price All

52

Q4

Price Quality Brand Name Taste Quality and Brand Name

Q5

Yes, Often I do sometimes No

53

Q6

Yes No In some cases In most cases

Q7

Yes No In some cases In most cases

54

Q8

Environment Hygiene Brand Price Environment and Hygiene

Q9

Strongly Agree Agree Neither agree or disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

55

Q10

Strongly Agree Agree Neither agree or disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

Q11

No In some cases In most cases

56

Q12

No In some cases In most cases

Appendix 3

Crosstabs
Notes

Output Created Comments Input Data

17-APR-2013 15:01:14

E:\Downloads\mv\rango\SPSS\two\Pizza Hut\spss\PizzaHut_thesis.sav

Filter Weight Split File N of Rows in Working Data File Missing Value Handling Cases Used Definition of Missing

<none> <none> <none> 50 User-defined missing values are treated as missing. Statistics for each table are based on all the cases with valid data in the specified range(s) for all variables in each table.

57

Syntax

CROSSTABS /TABLES=Age_Distribution BY Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 /FORMAT= AVALUE TABLES /STATISTIC=CHISQ /CELLS= COUNT /COUNT ROUND CELL /BARCHART .

Resources

Elapsed Time Dimensions Requested Cells Available

0:00:00.03 2 116508

Case Processing Summary

Cases Valid N Age_Distribution * Q1 Age_Distribution * Q2 Age_Distribution * Q3 Age_Distribution * Q4 Age_Distribution * Q5 Age_Distribution * Q6 Age_Distribution * Q7 Age_Distribution * Q8 Age_Distribution * Q9 Age_Distribution * Q10 Age_Distribution * Q11 Age_Distribution * Q12 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 Percent 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Missing Percent .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% N 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 Total Percent 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Age_Distribution * Q1
Crosstab

Count Q1 Highly Important Age_Distri bution 16-20 21-25 26-30 6 11 9 Important 3 5 4 Neutral 0 4 1 Do not bother 1 1 1 Not Important 1 2 1 Total 11 23 16

58

Total

26

12

50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 3.206(a) 4.102 .068 50 df 8 8 1 (2-sided) .921 .848 .795

a 11 cells (73.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .66.

Bar Chart

12

Q1
Highly Important Important Neutral

10

Do not bother Not Important

Count

0 16-20 21-25 26-30

Age_Distribution

Age_Distribution * Q2
Crosstab

Count Q2 Yes No Often 59 Sometimes Total

Age_Distri bution

16-20 21-25 26-30

4 7 10 21

2 6 2 10

5 7 3 15

0 3 1 4

11 23 16 50

Total

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 6.536(a) 7.191 1.369 50 df 6 6 1 (2-sided) .366 .304 .242

a 9 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .88.

Bar Chart

10

Q2
Yes No Often

Sometimes

Count
4 2 0 16-20 21-25 26-30

Age_Distribution

Age_Distribution * Q3
Crosstab

60

Count Q3 Style Age_Distri bution 16-20 21-25 26-30 Total 0 3 6 9 Colour 1 2 2 5 Brand 2 1 3 6 Price 1 5 1 7 All 7 12 4 23 Total 11 23 16 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 12.230(a) 13.939 7.336 50 df 8 8 1 (2-sided) .141 .083 .007

a 12 cells (80.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.10.

Bar Chart

12

Q3
Style Colour Brand

10

Price All

Count

0 16-20 21-25 26-30

Age_Distribution

Age_Distribution * Q4
61

Crosstab

Count Q4 Quality and Price Age_Distri bution 16-20 21-25 26-30 Total 4 4 2 10 Quality 3 3 1 7 Brand Name 2 3 4 9 Taste 1 4 0 5 Brand Name 1 9 9 19 Total 11 23 16 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 11.531(a) 13.447 5.663 50 df 8 8 1 (2-sided) .173 .097 .017

a 13 cells (86.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.10.

62

Bar Chart

10 Price

Q4

Quality Brand Name 8 Taste Quality and Brand Name

Count
4 2 0 16-20 21-25 26-30

Age_Distribution

Age_Distribution * Q5
Crosstab

Count Q5 Yes, Often Age_Distri bution 16-20 21-25 26-30 Total 1 8 4 13 I do sometimes 3 6 3 12 No 7 9 9 25 Total 11 23 16 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association 3.250(a) 3.612 .255 df 4 4 1 (2-sided) .517 .461 .614

63

N of Valid Cases

50

a 4 cells (44.4%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2.64.

Bar Chart

10

Q5
Yes, Often I do sometimes No

Count
4 2 0 16-20 21-25 26-30

Age_Distribution

Age_Distribution * Q6
Crosstab

Count Q6 In some Yes Age_Distri bution 16-20 21-25 26-30 Total 4 5 7 16 No 3 7 4 14 cases 2 5 3 10 In most cases 2 6 2 10 Total 11 23 16 50

Chi-Square Tests

Value

df

Asymp. Sig. 64

(2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 2.574(a) 2.630 .344 50 6 6 1 .860 .854 .557

a 9 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2.20.

Bar Chart

7 Yes No 6

Q6

In some cases In most cases

Count

0 16-20 21-25 26-30

Age_Distribution

Age_Distribution * Q7
Crosstab

Count Q7 In some Yes Age_Distri bution 16-20 21-25 26-30 Total 6 6 4 16 No 3 11 10 24 65 cases 2 2 1 5 In most cases 0 4 1 5 Total 11 23 16 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 7.511(a) 8.160 .434 50 df 6 6 1 (2-sided) .276 .227 .510

a 7 cells (58.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.10.

Bar Chart

12 Yes No

Q7

In some cases 10 In most cases

Count

0 16-20 21-25 26-30

Age_Distribution

Age_Distribution * Q8
Crosstab

Count Q8 Environment Hygiene Brand Price Environment and Total

66

Hygiene Age_Distri bution 16-20 21-25 26-30 Total 2 3 2 7 2 1 1 4 2 2 2 6 2 6 4 12 3 11 7 21 11 23 16 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 3.580(a) 3.330 .992 50 df 8 8 1 (2-sided) .893 .912 .319

a 12 cells (80.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .88.

Bar Chart

12

Q8
Environment Hygiene Brand

10

Price Environment and Hygiene

Count

0 16-20 21-25 26-30

Age_Distribution

Age_Distribution * Q9
Crosstab 67

Count Q9 Strongly Agree Age_Distri bution 16-20 21-25 26-30 Total 4 12 6 22 Agree 2 3 5 10 Neither agree or disagree 1 2 2 5 Disagree 2 6 3 11 Strongly disagree 2 0 0 2 Total 11 23 16 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 9.799(a) 8.686 .795 50 df 8 8 1 (2-sided) .279 .369 .373

a 12 cells (80.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .44.

Bar Chart

12 Agree

Q9
Strongly Agree

Neither agree or 10 disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 8

Count

0 16-20 21-25 26-30

Age_Distribution

68

Age_Distribution * Q10
Crosstab

Count Q10 Strongly Agree Age_Distri bution 16-20 21-25 26-30 Total 4 10 11 25 Agree 2 9 4 15 Neither agree or disagree 1 2 0 3 Disagree 4 1 0 5 Strongly disagree 0 1 1 2 Total 11 23 16 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 15.058(a) 15.021 4.355 50 df 8 8 1 (2-sided) .058 .059 .037

a 11 cells (73.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .44.

69

Bar Chart

12

Q10
Strongly Agree Agree Neither agree or

10

disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

Count

0 16-20 21-25 26-30

Age_Distribution

Age_Distribution * Q11
Crosstab

Count Q11 In some No Age_Distri bution 16-20 21-25 26-30 Total 3 10 8 21 cases 6 9 4 19 In most cases 2 4 4 10 Total 11 23 16 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association 2.632(a) 2.692 .234 df 4 4 1 (2-sided) .621 .611 .629

70

N of Valid Cases

50

a 5 cells (55.6%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2.20.

Bar Chart

10 No

Q11

In some cases In most cases 8

Count
4 2 0 16-20 21-25 26-30

Age_Distribution

Age_Distribution * Q12
Crosstab

Count Q12 In some No Age_Distri bution 16-20 21-25 26-30 Total 8 13 8 29 cases 1 2 3 6 In most cases 2 8 5 15 Total 11 23 16 50

Chi-Square Tests

Value

df

Asymp. Sig. 71

(2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 2.187(a) 2.180 .893 50 4 4 1 .701 .703 .345

a 5 cells (55.6%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.32.

Bar Chart

14 No

Q12

In some cases 12 In most cases

10

Count

0 16-20 21-25 26-30

Age_Distribution

Appendix 4

Crosstabs
Notes

Output Created Comments Input Data

17-APR-2013 14:35:22

E:\Downloads\mv\rango\SPSS\two\Pizza Hut\spss\PizzaHut_thesis.sav

Filter Weight

<none> <none>

72

Split File N of Rows in Working Data File Missing Value Handling Cases Used Definition of Missing

<none> 50 User-defined missing values are treated as missing. Statistics for each table are based on all the cases with valid data in the specified range(s) for all variables in each table.

Syntax

CROSSTABS /TABLES=Distribution_of_Gender BY Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 /FORMAT= AVALUE TABLES /STATISTIC=CHISQ /CELLS= COUNT /COUNT ROUND CELL /BARCHART .

Resources

Elapsed Time Dimensions Requested Cells Available

0:00:00.11 2 116508

Case Processing Summary

Cases Valid N Distribution_of_Gender * Q1 Distribution_of_Gender * Q2 Distribution_of_Gender * Q3 Distribution_of_Gender * Q4 Distribution_of_Gender * Q5 Distribution_of_Gender * Q6 Distribution_of_Gender * Q7 Distribution_of_Gender * Q8 Distribution_of_Gender * Q9 Distribution_of_Gender * Q10 Distribution_of_Gender * Q11 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 Percent 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Missing Percent .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% N 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 Total Percent 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

50

100.0%

.0%

50

100.0%

73

Distribution_of_Gender * Q12

50

100.0%

.0%

50

100.0%

Distribution_of_Gender * Q1
Crosstab

Count Q1 Highly Important Distribution_of_G ender Total Male Female 15 11 26 Important 7 5 12 Neutral 2 3 5 Do not bother 3 0 3 Not Important 4 0 4 Total 31 19 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 5.591(a) 7.950 2.483 50 df 4 4 1 (2-sided) .232 .093 .115

a 7 cells (70.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.14.

74

Bar Chart

15

Q1
Highly Important Important Neutral

12

Do not bother Not Important

Count
6 3 0 Male Female

Distribution_of_Gender

Distribution_of_Gender * Q2
Crosstab

Count Q2 Yes Distribution_of_G ender Total Male Female 12 9 21 No 7 3 10 Often 10 5 15 Sometimes 2 2 4 Total 31 19 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases .865(a) .866 .046 50 df 3 3 1 (2-sided) .834 .834 .830

a 3 cells (37.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.52. 75

Bar Chart

12

Q2
Yes No Often

10

Sometimes

Count

0 Male Female

Distribution_of_Gender

Distribution_of_Gender * Q3
Crosstab

Count Q3 Style Distribution_of_G ender Total Male Female 6 3 9 Colour 1 4 5 Brand 5 1 6 Price 4 3 7 All 15 8 23 Total 31 19 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association 5.157(a) 5.258 .196 df 4 4 1 (2-sided) .272 .262 .658

76

N of Valid Cases

50

a 7 cells (70.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.90.

Bar Chart

15

Q3
Style Colour Brand

12

Price All

Count
6 3 0 Male Female

Distribution_of_Gender

Distribution_of_Gender * Q4
Crosstab

Count Q4 Quality and Price Distribution_of_G ender Total Male Female 6 4 10 Quality 7 0 7 Brand Name 2 7 9 Taste 3 2 5 Brand Name 13 6 19 Total 31 19 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value df (2-sided)

77

Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases

10.693(a) 12.982 .000 50

4 4 1

.030 .011 .988

a 6 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.90.

Bar Chart

14 Price

Q4

Quality 12 Brand Name Taste Quality and Brand 10 Name

Count

0 Male Female

Distribution_of_Gender

Distribution_of_Gender * Q5
Crosstab

Count Q5 Yes, Often Distribution_of_G ender Total Male Female 9 4 13 I do sometimes 8 4 12 No 14 11 25 Total 31 19 50

Chi-Square Tests

78

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases .781(a) .785 .705 50 df 2 2 1 (2-sided) .677 .675 .401

a 2 cells (33.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 4.56.

Bar Chart

14

Q5
Yes, Often I do sometimes

12

No

10

Count

0 Male Female

Distribution_of_Gender

Distribution_of_Gender * Q6
Crosstab

Count Q6 In some Yes Distribution_of_G ender Total Male Female 7 9 16 No 10 4 14 cases 8 2 10 In most cases 6 4 10 Total 31 19 50

79

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 4.182(a) 4.257 1.250 50 df 3 3 1 (2-sided) .242 .235 .263

a 2 cells (25.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 3.80.

Bar Chart

10 Yes No

Q6

In some cases 8 In most cases

Count
4 2 0 Male Female

Distribution_of_Gender

Distribution_of_Gender * Q7
Crosstab

Count Q7 In some Yes No cases In most cases Total

80

Distribution_of_G ender Total

Male Female

11 5 16

13 11 24

3 2 5

4 1 5

31 19 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 1.631(a) 1.693 .039 50 df 3 3 1 (2-sided) .652 .638 .843

a 4 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.90.

Bar Chart

14 Yes No 12

Q7

In some cases In most cases

10

Count

0 Male Female

Distribution_of_Gender

Distribution_of_Gender * Q8
Crosstab

Count 81

Q8 Environment and Environment Distribution_of_G ender Total Male Female 3 4 7 Hygiene 3 1 4 Brand 3 3 6 Price 6 6 12 Hygiene 16 5 21 Total 31 19 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 4.271(a) 4.341 1.818 50 df 4 4 1 (2-sided) .371 .362 .178

a 7 cells (70.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.52.

Bar Chart

20

Q8
Environment Hygiene Brand Price

15

Environment and Hygiene

Count

10

0 Male Female

Distribution_of_Gender

Distribution_of_Gender * Q9

82

Crosstab

Count Q9 Strongly Agree Distribution_of_G ender Total Male Female 15 7 22 Agree 5 5 10 Neither agree or disagree 2 3 5 Disagree 7 4 11 Strongly disagree 2 0 2 Total 31 19 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 3.234(a) 3.871 .002 50 df 4 4 1 (2-sided) .520 .424 .969

a 6 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .76.

Bar Chart

15 Agree

Q9
Strongly Agree

Neither agree or disagree 12 Disagree Strongly disagree

Count
6 3 0 Male Female

Distribution_of_Gender

83

Distribution_of_Gender * Q10
Crosstab

Count Q10 Strongly Agree Distribution_of_G ender Total Male Female 17 8 25 Agree 9 6 15 Neither agree or disagree 2 1 3 Disagree 2 3 5 Strongly disagree 1 1 2 Total 31 19 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 1.585(a) 1.551 1.167 50 df 4 4 1 (2-sided) .812 .818 .280

a 6 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .76.

84

Bar Chart

20

Q10
Strongly Agree Agree Neither agree or disagree Disagree

15

Strongly disagree

Count

10

0 Male Female

Distribution_of_Gender

Distribution_of_Gender * Q11
Crosstab

Count Q11 In some No Distribution_of_G ender Total Male Female 11 10 21 cases 13 6 19 In most cases 7 3 10 Total 31 19 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association 1.429(a) 1.426 1.157 df 2 2 1 (2-sided) .489 .490 .282

85

N of Valid Cases

50

a 1 cells (16.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 3.80.

Bar Chart

14 No

Q11

In some cases 12 In most cases

10

Count

0 Male Female

Distribution_of_Gender

Distribution_of_Gender * Q12
Crosstab

Count Q12 In some No Distribution_of_G ender Total Male Female 18 11 29 cases 6 0 6 In most cases 7 8 15 Total 31 19 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value df (2-sided)

86

Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases

5.174(a) 7.183 .559 50

2 2 1

.075 .028 .455

a 2 cells (33.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2.28.

Bar Chart

20 No

Q12

In some cases In most cases

15

Count

10

0 Male Female

Distribution_of_Gender

87

Evaluation of alternative is the most important stage for consumer buying behavior: The case study of Pizza hut

Appendix; 04
Stages of consumers Buying behavior

88