OCCUPATIONAL STATUS

DIFFERENCES ON QUALITY OF
PRODUCTS AND PARKING
FACILITY OF BALAJU
BHATBHATENI SUPERSTORE
Presented by: Manisha Sharma

Symbol No: 18421/16

TU Registeration No: 7-2-271-30-2016

BBA 7th Semester

 Purpose of the Study
 To analyze the difference on the perception of

quality of products and parking facility across

the occupational status.

 Review of Literature
Study Major findings
(Paulins & Geistfeld, Identify significant and positive impact between the gender of the respondents and
2003) various offers and discounts offered by the departmental stores.
(Gomathi, Kishore, Found the significant and positive relationship between skilled sales person and
& Deepika, 2013) customer satisfaction.

Found positive effect of product consciousness, comfort with entertainment seeker,

(Ganapathi, 2015)
extra service conscious, and store and hygiene consciousness, price consciousness .

(Rana, Abdulla, & Identify significant and positive impact of parking facility and purchasing decision.
Islam, 2015) Observed negative effect of price and quality of products on the purchasing decision.

(Sameera, 2015) Identify positive effect of convenient store location, good quality, accurate quantity,
adequate number of sales people & customer satisfaction.

(Kumar, 2016) Revealed location have a insignificant effect on customer satisfaction although the
exploratory analysis and the secondary research supported it.

(Sudhahar & Observed the insignificant influence of e-payments on customers’ satisfaction

Chandrakala, 2018)
Observed negative effect of location and customers’ satisfaction.
 Conceptual framework

Quality of
products
Superstore attributes

Parking facility
 Research Methodology
 Research design

• Descriptive research design & ANOVA

 Population and sample
• All the customers of Balaju area above 18 years

• Convenience (non-probability) sampling from

different locations of Kathmandu
• Active participation 106 out of 120 sample
 Nature and sources of data

• Primary sources
Definition of Variables
• Quality of products
• Parking facility

Statistical tools used

• Descriptive research design
• Analysis of variance (ANOVA)
 Descriptive statistics for all samples

Variable/ Statistics N Mean Median Mode Std. Deviation Variance

Quality of products 106 3.08 3.13 3.50 0.76 0.59

Parking facility 106 2.98 3.00 3.00 1.00 1.00

 ANOVA- test for equality of means across
occupational status

Sum of Mean
Variables Squares df Square F Sig.
 
Between Groups 0.319 2 0.16
0.269 0.765
Quality of products Within Groups 61.124 103 0.593
Total 61.443 105
Between Groups 1.149 2 0.574
0.569 0.568
Parking facility Within Groups 104.042 103 1.01
Total 105.191 105      
Multiple comparisons LSD for all variables

(I) Occupational (J) Occupational Mean

Variables Sig.
Status Status Difference (I-J)
Govt. employees 0.04014 0.980
Students
Self employed 0.15959 0.752
Students -0.04014 0.980
Quality of products Govt. employees
Self employed 0.11944 0.902
Students -0.15959 0.752
Self employed
Govt. employees -0.11944 0.902
Govt. employees 0.0898 0.944
Students
Self employed 0.30091 0.555
Students -0.0898 0.944
Parking facility Govt. employees
Self employed 0.21111 0.832
Students -0.30091 0.555
Self employed
Govt. employees -0.21111 0.832
 Hypothesis Test

Hypothesis Results Tools

H01: There is no significant mean difference on the perception of quality

Accepted ANOVA
of products across students and government employees.

H02: There is no significant mean difference on the perception of quality

Accepted ANOVA
of products across students and self employed.

H03: There is no significant mean difference on the perception of

Accepted ANOVA
government employees and self employed.

H04: There is no significant mean difference on perception of parking

Accepted ANOVA
facility across students and government employees

H05: There is no significant mean difference on the perception of parking

Accepted ANOVA
facility across the students and self employed.

H06: There is no significant mean difference on the perception of parking

Accepted ANOVA
facility across the government employees and self employed.
 Conclusion
 Variety products is regarded as the first
important features of Balaju-Bhatbhateni
superstore.
 Quality of products to be highest
influencing factors of superstore.
 Limitations

 Not analyzed all the superstores of

Kathmandu valley
 Limited statistical tools
THANK YOU!