HP LAPTOPS - CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

SURVEY IN TIRUPATI

PRESENTED BY:
B. YUVA KISHORE
 CHAPTER-1

COMPANY PROFILE
MARKET SHARE
COMPANY PROFILE

 Hewlett Packard company (HP) is

an American multinational
Information Technology
organization that provides
hardware and software services to
small, medium and large sized
businesses across industries.
 The organization was founded by
William “Bill” Redington Hewlett
and Dave Packard in 1939.
 It was started in a car garage in
Palo Alto, California, where today it
is headquartered.
  They tossed a coin to decide
whether the company they
COMPANY PROFILE
founded would be called
Hewlett-Packard (HP) or
Packard-Hewlett
 The first product of HP was
an audio oscillator.
 Today, HP specializes in
developing and manufacturing
PCs, networking hardware,
computer storage and
delivering services
 One of the company's earliest
customers was Walt Disney
Productions
MARKET SHARE (as per 2018):
CHAPTER-2

OBJECTIVES
METHODOLOGY
LIMITATIONS
OBJECTIVES

To determine up to what extent the HP has satisfied the

customers.
To know the mode of purchase by the customers.
To determine the place of HP with respect to various
companies.
To determine the consumer satisfaction with regard to price
and technology
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
 Theprocess used to collect data and analyze it for the
purpose of making business decision. The methodology
may include surveys, interviews and other research
techniques.

 You
need to have a good research methodology in place
when trying to figure out new ideas for your company
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
 RESEARCH DESIGN : DESCRIPTIVE DESIGN
 DATA SOURCE:
 SECONDARY SOURCE : Survey Monkey.com
 PRIMARY SOURCE : Customers of HP Laptops
 RESEARCH APPROACH : Through Survey
 RESEARCH INSTRUMENT : Questionnaire
 SAMPLING PLAN:
 SAMPLE SIZE – 99
 SAMPLE FRAME – TIRUPATI
 SAMPLE METHOD – CONVENIENCE SAMPLING
 CONTACT METHOD : PERSONAL SURVEY
 STATISTICAL TOOL : CHI SQUARE TEST
LIMITATIONS
 The study is confirmed only to TIRUPATI city and not
the customers around the country.
 Time factor is the main constraint of the study.
 The research has been centered to only 99 customers
rather than millions of people.
 This study is based on the figure available and the
information given by the customers.
 CHAPTER-3

CUTOMER SATISFACTION
CONSUMER SATISFACTION
It is a measure of how products and services supplied by a company
meet customer expectation.

The no. of customers or percentage of total customers, whose

reported experience with a firm, it’s products, its services exceeds
specified satisfaction goals.

“Person’s feeling of pleasure or disappointment which resulted from

comparing a product’s perceived performance or outcome against
his/her expectations”.

(KOTLER AND KELLER)

 CHAPTER-4

DATA ANALYSIS
&
INTERPRETATION
Table no.1
GENDER DISTRIBUTION

NO.OF
GENDER %
RESPONDENTS

32%
MALE 67 MALE
67.67 FEMALE
68%
FEMALE 32
32.32
TOTAL 99 100 GENDER

Interpretation:
From the above table it is clear that 67.63% respondents belongs to “Male” and 32.32%
belongs to “Female” respondents .
Table no.2
AGE DISTRIBUTION

NO.OF
AGE % 45
RESPONDENTS 40

35

RESPONDENTS
21-25 YEARS 42 42.42 30

25
26-30 YEARS 36 36.36 20

15
31-35 YEARS 21 21.21
10

TOTAL 99 100 5

0
21-25 YEARS 26-30 YEARS 31-35 YEARS

AGE
Interpretation:
From the above table it is clear that 42.42 % respondents belongs to 21-25years, where as 36.36%
belongs to 26-30years, 21.21% belongs to 31-35years age group.
 Table no.3
TIME PERIOD
TIME No. OF Time period
%
PERIOD RESPONDENTS

Since 6months 24 24.24 24%

33%
Since 1 year 22 22.22 Since 6months
Since 1 year
Since2 years 21 21.21 Since2 years
22% More than 2 years
More than 2 21%
32 32.32
years
Total 99 100

INTERPRETATION
From the above table it is clear that, 32.32% respondents are using the HP LAPTOP for more
than 2 years.
Table no.4
TYPES INFLUENCING TO CHOOSE HP LAPTOP
NO.OF
TYPE RESPONDENT % 50

S 45
40

RESPONDENTS
LIGHT 46 46.46 35
30
HEAVY 7 7.07 25
20

NO OF
THIN 27 27.27 15
10
SLIM 19 19.19 5
0
TOTAL 99 100 LIGHT HEAVY THIN SLIM

TYPES

INTERPRETATION:
From the above table it can be concluded that most of the HP customers(46.46%) prefer
LIGHT laptops.
Table no.5
OCCUPATION DISTRIBUTION

NO.OF
PROFESSION % Others
RESPONDENTS 12%

Students
Students 39 39.39 Employee 40%
21%
Business 27 27.27
Employee 21 21.21
Business
Others 12 12.12 27%

TOTAL 99 100
PROFESSION
Interpretation:
From the above table, 39.39% of the respondents belongs to “Students”,Where as 27.27%
belongs to "Business" and 21.21% belongs to "Employee" and 12.12% belongs to "Others".
 Table no.6
REASON TO CHOOSE HP LAPTOP
No. OF RESPONDENTS
No. OF
REASON %
RESPONDENTS 31
27
BRAND 31 31.31 25

16
QUALITY 25 25.25

PRICE 16 16.16
ALL 27 27.27
BRAND QUALITY PRICE ALL
TOTAL 99 100

INTERPRETATION
From the above table it is clear that, 31.31% respondents choose HP LAPTOP for its BRAND
 Table no.7
MOST LIKED FEATURE
NO OF NO OF RESPONDENTS
FEATURES %
RESPONDENTS

PERFORMANCE 32 32.32 OTHERS

14%

PERFORMANC
DISPLAY 21 21.21 E
ALL 33%
20%
BATTERY 12 12.12

ALL 20 20.20
BATTERY DISPLAY
12% 21%
OTHERS 14 14.14

TOTAL 99 100
INTERPRETATION
From the above table it is clear that, 32.32% respondents liked the PERFORMANCE in HP
LAPTOP.
Table no.8
PREFERRED COLOUR
NO OF NO OF RESPONDENTS
COLOURS %
RESPONDENTS BLACK GOLD SILVER GRAY

BLACK 21 21.21 11%

24%
GOLD 19 19.19
43%
SILVER 37 37.37 22%

GRAY 9 9.09

TOTAL 99 100

INTERPRETATION
From the above table it is clear that, 3.37% respondents are preferring to purchase
SILVER Colour laptops.
 Table no.9
PRICE RANGE
PRICE NO OF % price
RESPONDEN
TS
15000-25000
15000-25000 16 16.16 45000above 16%
25%
25,000-35,000 22 22.22 25,000-
35,000
22%
35,000-45,000 36 16.16 35,000-
45,000
37%
45000above 25 25.25

total 99 100

INTERPRETATION:
from the above table most of the respondents prefer a price range of 35,000-
45,000.
 Table no.10
PREFERRED PLACE TO PURCHASE
NO OF Preferred place
PLACES %
RESPONDENTS OTHERS
4%

ONLINE 49 49.49
HP STORE
RETAILER 19 19.19 27%
ONLINE
50%

HP STORE 27 27.27
RETAILER
OTHERS 4 4.04 19%

TOTAL 99 100

INTERPRETATION
From the above chart it is clear that, 49.49% respondents are preferring to purchase on
ONLINE.
Table no.11
USAGE OF HP LAPTOP
NO. OF RESPONDENTS
NO. OF
USAGE % BUSINESS ENTERTAINMENT GAMING BASIC HOME NEEDS
RESPONDENTS

BUSINESS 26.26
26 14%
26%
ENTERTAINME
34.34
NT 34
25%
GAMING 25.25
25
BASIC HOME 35%
14.14
NEEDS 14

TOTAL 99 100

INTERPRETATION:
from the above table it is found that most of the respondents 34.34%
use their laptops for entertainmnt purposes.
Table no.11
MODE OF PURCHASE
NO . OF 40

NO OF RESPONDENTS
PURCHASE RESPONDEN % 35
TS 30

CASH BASIS 31 31.31 25

CARD BASIS 38 38.38 20

15
INSTALLMENT 25 25.25
10

OTHER 5 5.05 5

TOTAL 99 100 0
CASH BASIS CARD BASIS INSTALLMENT OTHER

MODE OF PURCHASE

Interpretation:
From the above table it is clear that 38.38% of the respondents are purchased through card basis
and 31.31% purchased through cash basis.
 Table no.12
SOURCE OF AWARENESS
NO. OF NO. OF RESPONDENTS
SOURCE RESPONDENT %
S 32
27
Advertisement 32.32 22
32
18
Social websites
27
27.27

Friends 18.18
18
others 22.22
22 Advertisement Social Friends others
websites
TOTAL 99 100
SOURCES

Interpretation:
From the above table it is clear that 32.32% of the respondents come to know about the hp
through Advertisement and 27.27% of the respondents know through social websites.
Table no.13
COMPETITORS OF HP LAPTOP
NO . OF

NO OF RESPONDENTS
50
COMPETITOR RESPONDEN % 45
TS 40

APPLE 9 9.09 35

30
DELL 43 43.43
25
ASUS 15 15.15 20

15
OTHERS 32 32.32
10

TOTAL 99 100 5

0
APPLE DELL ASUS OTHERS

COMPETITORS
INTERPRETATION:
from the above table it can be concluded that DELL is the
strongest competitor of HP.
Table no.14
ADVERTISEMENTS OF HP LAPTOPS
choice
NO . OF BAD GOOD IMPRESIVE
CHOICE %
RESPONDENTS

18%
BAD 18 18.18 32%

GOOD 49 49.49
50%
IMPRESIVE 32 32.32

TOTAL 99 100

Interpretation:
from the above table it is clear that Majority of the respondents i.e , 49.49% of the
respondents felt good about Advertisements of HP laptops.
Table no.15
SATISFACTION TOWARDS CUSTOMER CARE
35

NO OF RESPONDENTS
NO . OF
LEVEL %
RESPONDENTS 30

25
VERY
24 24.24
SATISDIED 20

SATISFIED 31 31.31 15

10
GOOD 29 29.29
5

BAD 15 15.15 0
VERY SATISFACTORY GOOD BAD
SATISFACTORY
TOTAL 99 100

SATISFACTION LEVEL
Interpretation:
From the above chart it is clear that 31.31% of the respondents are SATISFIED
with the CUSTOMER CARE of HP and 15% of the respondents felt bad about the customer care.
Table no.16
RECOMMEND TO OTHERS
NO.OF
RECOMME
RESPONDENT %
ND
S

OPINION
YES 68 68.68

NO 31 31.31

TOTAL 99 100
Yes No

Interpretation:
from the above, 68.68% of the respondents are willing to Recommend the HP LAPTOPS to
others and 31.31% of the respondent are not.
Table no.17
APPEARANCE AND PACKAGE
70

NO OF RESPONDENTS
NO . OF 60
LEVEL %
RESPONDENTS 50

EXCELLENT 25 25.25 40

30
GOOD 63.63
63 20

10
POOR 11.11
11 0
EXCELLENT GOOD POOR
TOTAL 99 100
LEVEL

Interpretation:
from the above table it is clear that Majority of the respondents i.e , 63.63% of the
respondents felt excellent about appearance and package .
Table no.18
COST OF MAINTANANCE
70

NO OF RESPONDENTS
NO . OF
COST % 60
RESPONDENTS
50
HIGH 22 22.22
40

AVERAGE 60.60 30
60
20
LOW 17.17
17 10

TOTAL 99 100 0
HIGH AVERAGE LOW

Cost of maintanance
Interpretation:
from the above table it is clear that Majority of the respondents i.e , 60.60% of the
respondents felt average about cost of maintanance .
Table no.19
OVERALL SATISFATION 30

NO . OF

NO OF RESPONDENTS
25
LEVEL RESPONDE %
24.24
NTS 22.22
20 21.21
HIGHLY SATISFIED 17 17.17
17.17
15
SATISFIED 24 24.24 15.15

INDIFFERENT 22 22.22 10

DISSATISFIED 21 21.21 5

HIGHLY
DISSATISFIED
15 15.15 0
HIGHLY SATISFIED INDIFFERENT DISSATISFIED HIGHLY
SATISFIED DISSATISFIED
TOTAL 99 100
SATISFACTION LEVEL
INTERPRETATION:
from the above table it is clear that 24% of the respondents
are satisfied with HP LAPTOPS.
 CHI-SQUARE ANALYSIS
NULL HYPOTHESIS (Ho) :
. The overall satisfaction level is independent of Male and Female towards
Airtel customers.

SATISFACTION
MALE FEMALE TOTAL
LEVEL

HIGHLY SATISFIED 10 07 17

SATISFIED 18 06 24
INDIFFERENT 14 08 22
DISSATISFIED 15 06 21
HIGHLY
10 05 15
DISSATISFIED
TOTAL 67 32 99
 OBSERVED EXPECTED
FREQUENCIE FREQUENCIES (O-E) * (O-E) [(O-E)*(O-E)]/E
O-E
(O) (E)

10 11.505 -1.505 2.265 0.1968

18 16.2424 1.7576 3.0891 0.19019
14 14.88 -0.88 0.7744 0.05204
15 14.212 0.788 0.620944 0.04369
10 10.1515 -0.1515 0.02295 0.00226
7 5.4949 1.5051 2.2653 0.4122
6 7.7575 -1.7575 3.0888 0.3981
8 7.1111 0.8889 0.79014 0.11114
6 6.7878 -0.7878 0.62062 0.09143
5 4.8484 0.152 0.023104 0.004765
TOTAL 1.502615
Calculated CHI SQUARE value : 1.502615
Degree of freedom =(r-1) (c-1)
= (2-1)(5-1)

=4

INFERENCE:
As the calculated CHI-SQUARE value ( 1.502615 ) is less than the table value or
critical valve (9.49) at 4 Degrees of freedom at 5% level of significance. So, we ACCEPT the null
hypothesis.
Hence, we conclude that the overall satisfaction level is independent of Male and
Female towards Airtel sim customers.
CHAPTER-5

FINDINGS
SUGGESSIONS
FINDINGS
 It is found that most of the customers are purchasing
through card basis.
 The survey indicates that majority of the consumer
wants to suggest HP to others.
 The sales promotional activities of HP are good and
further can be improved and maintained longer to
capture more market share.
SUGGESTIONS

 HP company should follow the promotional activities more like

offers which generally increase the sales.

 Thecompany and its dealers should increase the attachments

with the customers.