You are on page 1of 12

Chapter IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter primarily concerned with the presentation, analysis and


interpretation of findings of the survey made. Questionnaires were
distributed to determine if the study is feasible or not. All the data being
gathered were discussed in this part. This is also comprises the prototype of
the proposed system and the interpretation of all the results from the
researcher’s surveys.

Presentation of results

The researcher conducted survey to be able for him to acquire all the
probable solutions to problems and to be able to develop the proposed
system as helpful as possible. Questions from survey were answered based
on the respondent’s category.

Table 2.0

Summary Results of Survey Question of the Customer Respondents

Yes No Total

F P% F P% F P%
Questions

1. Do you find difficulty in manual


ordering?
14 93. 1 6.67 15 100
33 %
2. Did the existing system provide
information on acquired supplies?
3 20 12 80 15 100
%

3. Does it consume greater amount


of time in finishing certain task?
12 80 2 20 15 100
%

4. Do you feel the need of improving


it into online ordering system?
14 93. 1 6.67 15 100
33 %

5. Do you think it is better to have a


computerized system than a manual
15 100 0 0 15 100
system?
%

TOTAL PERCENTAGE 89 11% 100


% %

Table 2.0 shows the summary result of survey questionnaire tabulated,


coming from 15 costumer respondents. Based in the total percentage, 89%
of the costumer respondents answered yes and 11% of them answered no.
as a whole it gave a 100% total percentage.

Table 3.0

Summary Results of Survey Question of the Staff Respondents

Yes No Total

F P% F P% F P%
Questions
1. Is the existing system convenient
to use?
1 20 4 80 5 100
%

2. Do you find difficulty in the


existing system when it comes on
4 80 1 20 5 100
inventory and ordering?
%

3. Does the existing system provide


reliable results?
2 40 3 60 5 100
%

4. Do you think it is better to have a


computerized system than a manual
5 100 0 0 5 100
system?
%

5. Does the system and its data are


secured logically?
2 40 3 60 5 100
%

TOTAL PERCENTAGE 76 24% 100


% %

Table 3.0 shows the summary result of survey questionnaire tabulated,


coming from 5 staff respondents. Based in the total percentage, 76% of the
staff respondents answered yes and 24% of them answered no. as a whole it
gave a 100% total percentage.

Table 4.0
Software Evaluation Results of the Criterion for Accuracy

Weighted Mean Interpretation

Criteria

• Accuracy

1. Searching of data are 4.6 Excellent


accurate.

2. Information is 4.65 Excellent


understandable.

Average Mean 4.6 Excellent

Base from the table 4.0, it shows the results of the software evaluation
in the criteria accuracy conducted among 20 respondents proved that the
searching of data is accurate and it received a weighted mean of 4.6 which
the researcher interpret the data “Excellent”. On the other hand, based from
the information is understandable, the rating is 4.65 which the researcher
interpret the data as “Excellent”. As a whole, based from the accuracy of the
system, it received an average mean of 4.6 which the researcher interpret
the data as “Excellent”.

Table 5.0

Software Evaluation Results of the Criterion for Efficiency

Weighted Mean Interpretation

Criteria

• Efficiency

1. Effectiveness of the 4.75 Excellent


system.

2. Capacity to produce the 4.7 Excellent


desired result.

Average Mean 4.7 Excellent

From the table 5.0, it shows the results of the software evaluation in
the criteria efficiency conducted among 20 respondents proved that the
system is effective and it received a weighted mean of 4.75 which the
researcher interpret the data “Excellent”. On the other hand, based from the
capacity of the system to produce the desired result, the rating is 4.7 which
the researcher interpret the data as “Excellent”. As a whole, based from the
efficiency of the system, it received an average mean of 4.7 which the
researcher interpret the data as “Excellent”.

Table 6.0

Software Evaluation Results of the Criterion for Reliability

Weighted Mean Interpretation

Criteria

• Reliability

1. Perform the required 4.65 Excellent


function without errors.

2. Each function is 4.5 Excellent


dependable

Average Mean 4.57 Excellent


Based from the table 6.0, it shows the results of the software
evaluation in the criteria reliability conducted among 20 respondents proved
that the system can perform the required function without errors. and it
received a weighted mean of 4.65 which the researcher interpret the data
“Excellent”. On the other hand, based from each function is dependable, the
rating is 4.5, which the researcher interpret the data as “Excellent”. As a
whole, based from the reliability of the system, it received an average mean
of 4.57 which the researcher interpret the data as “Excellent”.

Table 7.0

Software Evaluation Results of the Criterion for Security

Weighted Mean Interpretation

Criteria

• Security

1. Provide restriction to an 4.65 Excellent


authorized user.

2. Proper combination of 4.6 Excellent


username and password.

Average Mean 4.6 Excellent

Based from the table 7.0, it shows the results of the software
evaluation in the criteria security conducted among 20 respondents proved
that the system can provide restriction to an authorized user and it received
a weighted mean of 4.65 which the researcher interpret the data “Excellent”.
On the other hand, based from combination of username and password, the
rating is 4.6, which the researcher interpret the data as “Excellent”. As a
whole, based from the security of the system, it received an average mean
of 4.6 which the researcher interpret the data as “Excellent”.

Table 8.0

Software Evaluation Results of the Criterion for Speed

Weighted Mean Interpretation

Criteria

• Security

1. Immediately shows the 4.55 Excellent


information needed.

2. Capacity of the system to 4.6 Excellent


process data.

Average Mean 4.65 Excellent

Based from the table 7.0, it shows the results of the software
evaluation in the criteria speed conducted among 20 respondents proved
that the system can immediately shows the information needed and it
received a weighted mean of 4.55 which the researcher interpret the data
“Excellent”. On the other hand, based from Capacity of the system to
process data, the rating is 4.6, which the researcher interpret the data as
“Excellent”. As a whole, based from the speed of the system, it received an
average mean of 4.65 which the researcher interpret the data as “Excellent”.

Table 9.0

Summary Results Software Evaluation of the Respondents


Weighted Mean Interpretation Ranking

Criteria

1. Accuracy 4.6 Excellent 3

2. Efficiency 4.7 Excellent 1

3. Reliability 4.57 Excellent 5

4. Security 4.6 Excellent 4

5. Speed 4.65 Excellent 2

Average Mean 4.6 Excellent

Table 9.0 reflected the tabulated result of costumer and staff


respondents. The software received a weighted mean of 4.7 be accuracy, 4.7
for efficiency, 4.6 for reliability. 4.65 For security and 4.65 for speed. It was
given an average mean of 4.6 interpreting as “Excellent”.

Presentation of Prototype Design

The system entitled “Online Ordering System for Star Fish Express
Inc.” has finally begun to have a successful system being developed should
be a better fit with user’s needs and expectations.

Figure 3.0 Log in form

The user will sigh in before they can access on the main menu. The user
should provide the correct username and password for successful login.

Figure 4.0 Main Menu form


Chapter V

Summary, Conclusion and Recommendations

This chapter sums up the entire study discuss in the previous chapter,
this section summarized the study in the aspect of objective methods along
with the conclusion and researcher’s recommendations.

Summary

This section reviews the proposed study through a brief discussion of


the objective methods and findings during the research.

The researcher aimed of helping the Star Fish Express Inc. to develop
Online Ordering to improve their ways of promoting their products the study
will prove that there is a significance difference between the existing system
and the proposed system. The proposed system will minimized whatever
difficulties and problems therein and will show that it is operationally,
technically and economically feasible.

The different methods used that greatly helped in the development of


the study of the system were data gathering instrument and data gathering
methods. It played a big part in the completion of the study. The success
depends on accuracy of the data gathering. From the results the researcher
was able to determine if the objective of the study were successfully
achieved/

In designing the architecture of the system the researcher use the


System Development Life Cycle. This model includes planning to ensure that
the outcome of the software will meet the expectation of the user.
Summary of Findings

Based on the researcher’s data gathering and interviews some findings


are determined by the researcher.

1) Survey Questionnaire

Transparently, based from the response of 15 staff respondents,


89% of them were pleased to the development of a new system and on
the 5 staff respondents they wish to have changes on their existing
system. It also proven that there are problems being encountered.

2) Software Evaluation

In light with the software evaluation results, it reflects the


appreciation of the respondents in the development of the software
having a weighed mean of 4.56 representing “excellent”.

Conclusion

It therefore concludes that the proposed system has met his objectives
stated in the chapter one of the document. It also answered at the problems
and questions in the existing system.

Recommendation
From the results and findings of the study of the system was useful to the
users. This study cal also be used as relevant study materials for future
researcher who would like to implement Online Ordering system for other
companies. The researcher also recommends that those who wish to make or
similar study can expand the feature of the proposed system.

The researcher recommends the developed system to those who want to


make some changes.

1. Accept all types of payments.