Analysis of Coffee World Questionnaire

Checking the store logo they visited.

Finding 1: Not everyone might recognize the store by its logo, especially if the logos for
different branches are similar or if the print quality is not optimal.

Finding 2: Not environmentally friendly: Using logos (especially if they're colored) can
increase printing costs and is less eco-friendly than simply listing branch names.

Finding 3: Potential for misidentification: Customers might confuse logos or forget which
one they visited, especially if their visit was a while ago.

In-store promotions' effectiveness.

Finding 1: No neutral option available, which can lead to bias.

Finding 2: Ambiguity: What constitutes 'effective' is not defined.

Finding 3: No context: It doesn't specify what kind of promotions. Are they referring to
discounts, events, displays, or something else?

Finding 4: Response bias: Without a neutral option, customers might feel pressured into
picking a side, potentially skewing results.

Questions about a privilege card.

Finding 1: The subsequent question about rating the service should be conditional based on
a 'Yes' response to having a card. Otherwise, it's irrelevant and confusing for those without
a card.

Age groups.
Finding 1: Over-segmentation: Need to consider the purpose behind such detailed age
segmentation.

Finding 2: No section break: Age is a demographic detail and might be better placed in a
separate 'Demographic Information' section.

Finding 3: Sensitivity: Some customers might be reluctant to disclose their age. An option
like 'Prefer not to say' can be more inclusive.
Comparing the Coffee World brand to other brands.
Finding 1: Scale inconsistency: The options range from very positive to very negative
without a clear progression.

Finding 2: Ambiguity in terms: What does 'Same as Others' mean? Does it mean average, or
does it mean they have no preference? It's not clear.

Whether the customer would visit again.

Finding 1: Potential for a middle ground, like a 'Maybe' or 'Not Sure' option.

What customers like most about products and services.

Finding 1: This question is very broad. It might yield more actionable feedback if broken
down into specific areas like taste, variety, ambiance, or service.

Finding 2: Overloading: By asking about both products and services in one question, you
might miss detailed feedback on each. Splitting this can offer more insights.

Suggestions for improvement.

Finding 1: Open-ended questions can yield varied responses, making analysis challenging.
Consider providing specific areas or prompts to guide feedback.

Finding 2: Lack of specificity: Providing categories (e.g., taste, ambiance, service, variety)
can help respondents articulate their thoughts better.

Preferred location for the next Coffee World branch.

Finding 1: Without provided options or context, this question might yield a wide variety of
answers. Some might be too vague or non-actionable.

Finding 2: Feasibility: Without providing options or a context, some suggestions might be

infeasible or too general (e.g., 'somewhere in the north').

Frequency of visits.
Finding 1: There's a potential gap between options. Consider adding a '2-3 times a month'
option.

Finding 2: Lack of granularity: What about customers who visit multiple times a week? An
option like 'Several times a week' might be necessary.
How customers learned about the brand.
Finding 1: Missing modern methods of discovery, such as 'Online/Internet' or 'Social Media'.

Finding 2: Overlapping categories: 'Passing by' and 'Word of Mouth' can sometimes overlap.
A friend might mention the cafe, and then they notice it while passing by.

Contact information.
Finding 1: Privacy concerns: It should be made clear that this section is optional.
Additionally, explaining how the data will be used can alleviate concerns.

Finding 2: No section break: Contact information should be distinctly separated, possibly

with a note on its optional nature and purpose.

General Findings:
Section Breaks: The questionnaire lacks clear section breaks, which can help in organizing
questions and guiding the respondent.

Physical Only: The absence of an online version might limit the reach and response rate.

Purpose Alignment: Some questions might not directly align with the primary goal of
improving service and food/beverage quality.

Length: Too long questionnaires can lead to survey fatigue, causing respondents to rush or
abandon it.

Flow and Grouping: Related questions should be grouped together for better flow and ease
of answering.

Instructions: Clear instructions for each section or type of question can help respondents
understand what's expected.

Feedback Utilization: There's no mention of how the feedback will be used. Informing
respondents can motivate them to provide more accurate and detailed answers.