Nissan

Research Topic :
Customer Satisfaction
Towards Nissan Motors
India Pvt Ltd
By : Mayank Patel
Subject : S.I.P
Class : MBA (Marketing Management)
Roll number : 16
Table Of Contents
Chapter Number
Description
Chapter 1
Introduction
Chapter 2
Literature Review
Chapter 3
Research Methodology
Chapter 4
Data Analysis And Interpretations
Chapter 5
Findings
Chapter 6
Conclusion
Chapter : 1 Introduction
Chapter : 2 Literature Review
Happy with Nissan

Customer Service
Campaign Enters Third
Season
--Business Wire India
May 13, 2015
Chapter 3 : Research
Methodology
Chapter 3 :
Scaling Technique
Methodology
Methodology
Research
Design
Chapter 4 : Data Analysis &

Interpretations
Cronbach's Alpha
N of Items
.839
19
Interpretation :
If it goes above 0.7 then it is reliable.
Reliability Test

Interpretations
Frequency Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid
Student
18.4
18.4
18.4
Self
27
55.1
55.1
73.5
Others
13
26.5
26.5
100.0
Total
49
100.0
100.0
employed
Frequency Distribution. (1) Occupation
Interpretation:
Majority
respondents are self
employed that is
27,13 respondents
are students and
only 9 respondents
belongs to other
categories.

Interpretations
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
39
79.6
79.6
79.6
Female
10
20.4
20.4
100.0
Total
49
100.0
100.0
Male
Valid
Frequency Distribution. (2) Gender
Interpretation:
Majority
respondents are
males that is 39 and
only 10 respondents
are females.
Methodology
Frequen Percent
Valid Percent
cy
Valid
Cumulative
Percent
Nissan Micra
25
51.0
51.0
51.0
Sunny
20
40.8
40.8
91.8
Terrano
2.0
2.0
93.9
other 3
6.1
6.1
100.0
100.0
100.0
Any
Nissan variant
Total
49
Frequency Distribution. (3) Car Model
Interpretation:
majority
respondents owe
Nissan Micra 25
then seconds comes
Sunny that is 20
then third comes
other variant of
Nissan that is 3 and
the last which is
Terrano that sums
up to 1.
Methodology
Frequen Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
cy
Less than 1 4
8.2
8.2
8.2
year
Valid
1-2 years
10
20.4
20.4
28.6
2-3 years
21
42.9
42.9
71.4
More than 3 14
28.6
28.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
years
Total
49
Freq. (4) How long you have been using
Interpretation:
21 respondents owe
Nissan car from 2-3
years then seconds
comes 14 respondents
who owes Nissan car
from more than 3 years
then third 10
respondents who owes
Nissan car from 1-2
years and lastly there
are 4 respondents who
owes Nissan car from
less than a year.

Interpretations
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
6. Satisfaction of
variant of own
Valid
Cumulative
Percent
Yes
48
98.0
98.0
98.0
No
2.0
2.0
100.0
Total
49
100.0
100.0
Frequency.D (5) Delivery Time
Interpretation:
47 respondents says
that delivery of car
was done on time
and the rest 2
respondents says
that delivery of car
was not done on
time.

Interpretations
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
6. Satisfaction of
variant of own
Valid
Cumulative
Percent
Yes
48
98.0
98.0
98.0
No
2.0
2.0
100.0
Total
49
100.0
100.0
(6) Satisfaction Of variant of own
Interpretation:
48 respondents say
that they are
satisfied from the
variant that they own
and the rest which is
1, is not satisfied
with the variant.

Interpretations
Frequency Percent
Valid Percent
7. Staff Satisfaction
No
Valid
Yes
Total
Cumulative
Percent
4.1
4.1
4.1
47
95.9
95.9
100.0
49
100.0
100.0
(7) Staff Satisfaction
Interpretation:
47 respondents,
says that they are
satisfied with with
staff working at
Nissan while 2
respondents says
that they are not
satisfied with the
staff working at
Nissan.

Interpretations
Frequency Percent
Valid Percent
7. Staff Satisfaction
No
Valid
Yes
Total
Cumulative
Percent
4.1
4.1
4.1
47
95.9
95.9
100.0
49
100.0
100.0
(7) Staff Satisfaction
Interpretation:
47 respondents,
says that they are
satisfied with with
staff working at
Nissan while 2
respondents says
that they are not
satisfied with the
staff working at
Nissan.

Interpretations
8. Staff Knowledge
Dont Know
Valid
Yes
No
Total
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
4.1
4.1
4.1
43
4
49
87.8
8.2
100.0
87.8
8.2
100.0
91.8
100.0
(8) Staff Knowledge
Interpretations:
43 respondents says
yes that the staff
working at Nissan
has proper knowledge
while 4 respondents
says no the staff
working at Nissan does
not has proper
knowledge and the 2
respondents say that
they dont know
whether the staff
working at Nissan
has proper knowledge
or not.
Chapter 4
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent Cumulative
9. Know Initially Of Brand Or

Car
Valid
Percent
Advertisment
34
69.4
69.4
69.4
Referral
8.2
8.2
77.6
Location
2.0
2.0
79.6
SMS
2.0
2.0
81.6
Tele-in
2.0
2.0
83.7
Walk-in
6.1
6.1
89.8
Replace
4.1
4.1
93.9
Corporate
6.1
6.1
100.0
Total
49
100.0
100.0
(9)Know Initially Of Brand or Car
Interpretations:
34 respondents ,says
yes came to know for
initially buying the car
of this brand or from
the dealer from
Advertisement , 4
respondents from
referral ,1 from location
, 1 from SMS , 1 from
Tele-in , 3 from Walkin , 3 from Replace and
3 from corporate.
Chapter 4
Characteristics
Very
Satisfied
Satisfied
Neutral
Dissatisifi
ed
Very Dis
satsfied
1.Shape
2.Technology
3.Price
4.Finance Scheme
5.Brand Image
6.Interiors
7.Comfort
8.Power
9.Space
10.Maintenance
(Tech.)
(Price)
(Finance Scheme)
(Brand Img)
(Interiors)
(Comfort)
(Power)
Interpretations:
The mean are less than 3 so it can be
concluded that all the customers are very
satisfied with the characteristics of the car.
Here majority customers are very satisfied with
maintenance, space and power.
Descriptive
(Shape)
(Space)
(Maintenance)
Mean
49
1.9592
49
1.8980
49
1.8776
49
1.8367
49
1.7959
49
1.6735
49
1.6531
49
1.5918
49
1.5510
49
1.4898
Question : Please rate Nissan against each attribute , if you can.
Chapter 4
Questions
Very
Satisfied
Satisfied
Neutral
Dissatisfie
d
Very
Dissatisfie
d
1.Ease of contacting the person who

is attending you at Nissan.
(Ease)
2.Concerns were heard
( Concerns)
3.Time taken for resolution
( Resolution)
4.Satisfaction
level
regarding
information clarity about the car
provided.
5.Satisfaction level regarding the
products and services offered
(Info. Clarity)
(Prod & Service)
6.Satisfaction level regarding calls

for periodic car servicing
(Periodic Calls)
7.Satisfaction level regarding post

follow up for after servicing of car.
(Post follow up)
8.Satisfaction level with the extra

benefits provided by the dealer/sales
person?
(Extra benefits)
9.Satisfaction level with the finance

service provided at Nissan?
(Finance)
Mean
49
2.1837
49
2.0816
49
2.0204
49
1.9388
49
1.8980
49
1.7959
49
1.7959
49
1.7959
49
1.6735
Interpretations: The customers are very satisfied with the characteristics of the car. Here
majority customers are very satisfied with Satisfaction level regarding information clarity about the
car provided , Satisfaction level regarding the products and services offered and Satisfaction level
with the extra benefits provided by the dealer/sales person.
Descriptive
Question : Customer Satisfaction Towards The Dealership
Chapter 4
Questions
1.Very
2.Satisfie 3.Neutr
Satisfied d
al
1.Satisfaction level
towards the fuel
consumption of your
car.
4.Dissatisfi
ed
5.Very
Dissatisfie
d
Mean
49
1.8571
49
1.7959
49
1.6735
49
1.6531
Fuel consumption
2. Satisfaction level
with
safety
and
comfort of your car.
Safety & Comfort
3. Satisfaction level
with the maintenance
cost of your car.
Maintenance
4.Overall
purchase
experience.
Purchase experience
Interpretations: The customers are very satisfied with the characteristics of the car. Here
majority customers are very satisfied with Satisfaction level regarding information clarity about the
car provided , Satisfaction level regarding the products and services offered and Satisfaction level
with the extra benefits provided by the dealer/sales person.
Descriptive
Question : Customer Satisfaction Towards The Car
Chapter 4
1.Probably would
2.Probably
3.Definatel
4.Definately
not
Not
Descriptive Statistics
Replace vehicle in
Mean
49
1.3673
case
Valid N (listwise)
49
Interpretations:
Most of the customers are ready to purchase another vehicle of this brand .
Descriptive
vehicle
Question : Based on your overall experience would you like to purchase another
of this brand/dealer or if you have to replace within a year? (please put a tick mark)
Chapter 4
1.Extermely
2.Very
Comfortable
Comfortable
3.Neutral
4.Somewhat
5.Very
Uncomfortable
Uncomfortabl
Dealership
comfort
Mean
49
1.9592
level
Valid N (listwise)
49
Interpretations:
Mostly customers are extremely comfortable with the way of dealership worked with them to
determine the final price or monthly payments for their new vehicle.
Descriptive
Question : Overall, how comfortable were you with the way the dealership worked with
you to determine the final price or monthly payments for your new vehicle? ( please put a tick mark )
Chapter 4
1.Good
2.Very Good
3.Average
4. Bad
N
Mean
49
1.6939
Overall Satisfaction
49
Valid N
Interpretations:
Mostly customers has , towards good to very good satisfaction
level about Nissan.
Descriptive
Question : Your overall Satisfaction Level about Nissan? ( please put a tick mark )
Chapter 4
Value
df
Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square
23.457a
.000
Likelihood Ratio
11.167
.011
10.696
.001
Linear-by-Linear Association
N of Valid Cases
49
H01: there is no association

between staff working satisfaction
and staff knowledge.
H11: there is association between
staff working satisfaction and staff
knowledge.
Interpretations:
Significant value is 0.000 which is < 0.05 so I reject H01 and
accept H11, also conclude that there is association between staff
working satisfaction and staff knowledge.
CHI SQUARE
Question : Staff working satisfaction with staff knowledge.
Chapter 4
Mean
Nissan Micra
Sunny
Terrano
Any other Nissan variant
Total
2.1200
1.6500
1.0000
1.6667
1.8776
H01: there is no significance impact of price on model group

H11: there is a significance impact of price on model group
Interpretations: Significant value is .031 which is < 0.05 so I

reject H01and accept H11, also conclude that there is a
significance impact of price on model group. Also Nissan Micra
has more impact on the price model you own.
ANOVA
Question :The model you own and its price
Chapter 4
Sum of
df
Mean
Squares
Between
6.266
Sig.
Mean
Square
3
2.089
5.263
Nissan Micra
.003
Sunny
Groups
Within
17.857
45
.397
Any other Nissan variant
Groups
Total
Terrano
24.122
48
Total
1.8800
1.1500
1.0000
1.6667
1.5510
H02: there is no significance impact of comfort on model group

H12: there is a significance impact of comfort on model group
Interpretations: Significant value is 0.003 which is < 0.05 so I

reject H02 and accept H12 , also conclude that there is sig
impact of comfort on model group. Also it is shows that Nissan
Micra car has more comfort on the basis of variant owned.
ANOVA
Question :The comfort of car with the type of model you own
Chapter 4
Sum of
Df
Mean
Squares
Between
5.028
Total
Mean
Square
3
1.676
8.183
.000
Very Satisfied
Satisfied
Groups
Within Groups
Sig.
9.217
45
14.245
48
.205
Neutral
Total
1.0769
1.6897
1.4286
1.4898
H03: there is no significance impact of space on price group

H13: there is a significance impact of comfort on model group

reject H03 and accept H13 , also conclude that there is
significance impact of space on model group. Also it shows that
customers are satisfied with the comfort of their variants price
they bought in.
ANOVA
Question : The space of car you get with total price of the car
Chapter 4
Sum of
Df
Mean
Squares
Between
2.532
Sig.
Mean
Square
1
2.532
4.968
.031 No
Groups
Within
23.957
47
26.490
48
.510
1.8511
Yes
Groups
Total
3.0000
1.8980
Total
H04: there is no significance impact of concerns on staff working satisfaction

H14: there is a significance impact of concerns on staff working satisfaction

reject H04 and accept H14, also conclude that there is
significance impact of concerns on staff working satisfaction.
Also it shows that Customers says yes that the staff working is
satisfactory and their concerns were concerned.
ANOVA
Question : If the staff working is satisfactory were the concerns concerned
Chapter 4
Sum of
Df
Mean
Squares
Sig.
Mean
Square
No
6.065
Between
2.022
Groups
20.424
45
26.490
48
.454
4.455
.008
Yes
Dont Know
2.7500
1.7674
3.0000
Within Groups
Total
Total
1.8980
H05: there is no significance impact of concerns on staff knowledge.

H15: there is a significance impact of concerns on staff knowledge.

reject H05 and accept H15, also conclude that there is a
significance impact of concerns on staff knowledge. Also it
shows in descriptive table that the mean is 1.7674 = Yes which
means, customers says yes the staff has proper knowledge the
concerns can be heard and reacted accordingly.
Question : If the staff has proper knowledge the concerns can be heard and reacted accordingly
Chapter 4
Sum of
Df
Mean
Squares
Between
7.811
23.169
45
Mean
2.604
.515
5.057
.004 No
Yes
Dont Know
Groups
Total
Sig.
Square
Groups
Within
30.980
48
Total
3.2500
1.8864
3.0000
2.0204
H06: there is no significance impact of time taken for resolution on staff knowledge.
H16: there is a significance impact of time taken for resolution on staff knowledge.

reject H06 and accept H16, also conclude that there is a
significance impact of time taken for resolution on staff
knowledge. Also it shows that in descriptive table the mean is
1.8864 = Yes which means the customers says yes the staff
has proper knowledge then time taken for resolution would be
Question : If staff has proper knowledge then time taken for resolution would be satisfactory
satisfactory.
Chapter 4
Sum of
Df
Mean
Squares
Between
5.767
Total
Sig.
Mean
Square
3
1.922
Groups
Within Groups
4.284
.010 No
Yes
20.192
45
.449
Dont Know
25.959
48
Total
2.7500
1.7045
2.0000
1.7959
H07: there is no significance impact of Satisfaction level regarding information clarity

about the car provided with staff knowledge
H17: there is a significance impact of Satisfaction level regarding information clarity
about the car provided with staff knowledge
Interpretations: Significant value is 0.010 which is < 0.05 so I reject H07 and
accept H17, also conclude that there is a significance impact of Satisfaction level
regarding information clarity about the car provided with staff knowledge. Also it
shows that in descriptive table that the mean is 1.7045 = Yes which means that the
customers say yes the staff has proper knowledge thats why satisfaction level
regarding information clarity about the car is satisfactory.
Question : If the staff has proper knowledge then satisfaction level regarding information clarity about
the car would be satisfactory.
Chapter 4
Sum of
Df
Mean
Squares
Between
3.026
Sig.
Mean
Square
3
1.009
Groups
Within
3.849
.016 No
Yes
11.791
45
14.816
48
.262
Dont Know
Groups
Total
Total
1.5000
1.9545
3.0000
1.9388
H08 : there is no sig impact of Satisfaction level with the finance service provided at
Nissan with staff knowledge.
H18: there is a sig impact of Satisfaction level with the finance service provided at
Nissan with staff knowledge.
Interpretations: Significant value is 0.016 which is < 0.05 so I reject H08

and accept H18, also conclude that there is a significance impact of
Satisfaction level with the finance service provided at Nissan with staff
knowledge. Also it shows that in descriptive table the 1.9545 = yes , the
customers says yes the staff has proper knowledge thats why the finance
service provided according to customers need at Nissan.
Question : If the staff has proper knowledge then the finance service would be provided to according to
customer need at Nissan
Chapter 4
Mean
Std. Deviation
Mode
Cust_sat_Dealer
1.9093
.38999
49
(Shape)
1.7959
.57661
49
(Tech)
1.5918
.53690
49
(Price)
1.8776
.63353
49
(Finance Scheme)
1.9592
.61098
49
(Brand Img)
1.6735
.62543
49
(Interior)
1.8980
.62065
49
(Comfort)
1.5510
.70891
49
(Power)
1.6531
.72316
49
(Space)
1.4898
.54476
49
(maintenance)
1.8367
.68760
49
R
.593a
R Square
.352
Adjusted R
Std. Error of the
Square
Estimate
.181
.35293
Interpretations: 35% variance is explained by from model summary table, we can
see that
the value of R (coefficient of correlation) equals 0.593 and the value of R square is equivalent to
0.352 indicating that 35.00% of the variance in dependent variable (i.e. Characteristics) explained
by two independent variables (i.e. Space and Maintenance ).
REGRESSION
Chapter 4
Multivariate
Model Summary
Mean
Std. Deviation
Model
R Square
Adjusted R Std. Error of
Replace vehicle in case
1.3673
.78246
49
(Ease)
1.6735
.59118
49
(Concerns)
1.8980
.74288
(Resolution)
2.0204
.80337
.549a
.301
.140
1
49 a. Predictors: (Constant), Satisfaction towards Dealership
49
(Info Clarity)
1.7959
.73540
49
(Prod & Service)
1.7959
.53927
49
(Periodic Calls)
1.7959
.64484
49
(Post Follow Up)
2.1837
.72668
49
(Extra benefits)
2.0816
.67196
49
(Finance Service)
1.9388
.55558
49
REGRESSION
Square
the Estimate
.72575
Chapter 4
Unstandardized
Standardized
Coefficients
Coefficients
Model
Std. Error
Beta
Sig.
VIF
(Constant)
1.732
.626
(Ease)
-.483
.273
-.365
-1.770
.085
2.368
(Concerns)
.593
.331
.563
1.788
.082
5.525
(Resolution)
-.084
.314
-.086
-.268
.790
5.799
(Info Clarity)
.127
.208
.119
.610
.546
2.133
(Prod & Service)
.148
.246
.102
.601
.551
1.599
(Periodic Calls)
.225
.174
.186
1.297
.202
1.145
(Post Follow Up)
-.324
.155
-.301
-2.094
.043
1.154
(Extra benefits)
-.381
.178
-.327
-2.139
.039
1.302
(Finance Service)
.047
.217
.033
.215
.831
1.323
Interpretations: Here in this table 30% variance is explained by from model summary table,
we can see that the value of R (coefficient of correlation) equals 0.549 and the value of R square is
equivalent to 0.301 indicating that 30.00% of the variance in dependent variable (i.e. Overall experience
like to purchase another vehicle) explained by three independent variables (i.e. extra benefits, post
follow up and Concers).
REGRESSION
Chapter 4
Unstandardized
Standardized
Coefficients
Coefficients
Model
Std. Error
Beta
Sig.
VIF
(Constant)
1.732
.626
(Ease)
-.483
.273
-.365
-1.770
.085
2.368
(Concerns)
.593
.331
.563
1.788
.082
5.525
(Resolution)
-.084
.314
-.086
-.268
.790
5.799
(Info Clarity)
.127
.208
.119
.610
.546
2.133
(Prod & Service)
.148
.246
.102
.601
.551
1.599
(Periodic Calls)
.225
.174
.186
1.297
.202
1.145
(Post Follow Up)
-.324
.155
-.301
-2.094
.043
1.154
(Extra benefits)
-.381
.178
-.327
-2.139
.039
1.302
(Finance Service)
.047
.217
.033
.215
.831
1.323
REGRESSION
Chapter 4
Unstandardized
Standardized
Coefficients
Coefficients
Model
Std. Error
Beta
Sig.
VIF
(Constant)
1.732
.626
(Ease)
-.483
.273
-.365
-1.770
.085
2.368
(Concerns)
.593
.331
.563
1.788
.082
5.525
(Resolution)
-.084
.314
-.086
-.268
.790
5.799
(Info Clarity)
.127
.208
.119
.610
.546
2.133
(Prod & Service)
.148
.246
.102
.601
.551
1.599
(Periodic Calls)
.225
.174
.186
1.297
.202
1.145
(Post Follow Up)
-.324
.155
-.301
-2.094
.043
1.154
(Extra benefits)
-.381
.178
-.327
-2.139
.039
1.302
(Finance Service)
.047
.217
.033
.215
.831
1.323
REGRESSION
Chapter 5 : Findings
Chapter 5 : Findings
Chapter 6 : Conclusion
So, after all the survey, data analysis and findings I found out some
concrete conclusion about Nissan Motors India Private Limited and hence
I conclude that a Nissan car provides comforts in all their models .Yet, an
affordable price. Nissan revolution in Design, Advanced Intuitive
Technology , State of-the-art connective services and above all IT IS A
DYNAMIC RIDE & HANDLING putting the driver in Total control .There
is nothing like a Nissan to make a statement to say You have arrived.
Thank You

Nissan

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nissan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Topic :

Data Analysis And Interpretations

Chapter : 2 Literature Review

Happy with Nissan

Chapter 4 : Data Analysis &

Chapter 4 : Data Analysis &

Frequency Distribution. (1) Occupation

Chapter 4 : Data Analysis &

Frequency Distribution. (2) Gender

Frequency Distribution. (3) Car Model

Freq. (4) How long you have been using

Chapter 4 : Data Analysis &

Frequency.D (5) Delivery Time

Chapter 4 : Data Analysis &

(6) Satisfaction Of variant of own

Chapter 4 : Data Analysis &

(7) Staff Satisfaction

Chapter 4 : Data Analysis &

(7) Staff Satisfaction

Chapter 4 : Data Analysis &

(8) Staff Knowledge

Valid Percent Cumulative

9. Know Initially Of Brand Or

(9)Know Initially Of Brand or Car

Question : Please rate Nissan against each attribute , if you can.

1.Ease of contacting the person who

2.Concerns were heard

3.Time taken for resolution

6.Satisfaction level regarding calls

7.Satisfaction level regarding post

(Post follow up)

8.Satisfaction level with the extra

9.Satisfaction level with the finance

Question : Customer Satisfaction Towards The Dealership

Safety & Comfort

Question : Customer Satisfaction Towards The Car

H01: there is no association

Question : Staff working satisfaction with staff knowledge.

H01: there is no significance impact of price on model group

Interpretations: Significant value is .031 which is < 0.05 so I

Question :The model you own and its price

Any other Nissan variant

H02: there is no significance impact of comfort on model group

Interpretations: Significant value is 0.003 which is < 0.05 so I

H03: there is no significance impact of space on price group

Interpretations: Significant value is 0.00 which is < 0.05 so I

H04: there is no significance impact of concerns on staff working satisfaction

Interpretations: Significant value is 0.031 which is < 0.05 so I

Question : If the staff working is satisfactory were the concerns concerned

H05: there is no significance impact of concerns on staff knowledge.

Interpretations: Significant value is 0.008 which is < 0.05 so I

Interpretations: Significant value is 0.004 which is < 0.05 so I

H07: there is no significance impact of Satisfaction level regarding information clarity

Interpretations: Significant value is 0.016 which is < 0.05 so I reject H08

Std. Error of the

Interpretations: 35% variance is explained by from model summary table, we can

Adjusted R Std. Error of

Replace vehicle in case

(Prod & Service)

(Post Follow Up)

(Prod & Service)

(Post Follow Up)

(Prod & Service)

(Post Follow Up)