Anuruddha - analysis.docx

7/29/2019 Anuruddha - analysis.docx

1/15

CHAPTER IV

DATA PRESENTATION & ANALYSIS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter will focus on presenting the data which was gathered through the previous chapter

of the research. The data pertaining to the ENHANCING CUSTOMER SATISFACTION BY

IMPROVING PROCUREMENT FUNCTIONS IN THE SUPPLY CHAIN would be presented

according to the questionnaire and findings. The sample characteristics will be illustrated

graphically and the composition of the respondents would be also illustrated. The responses for

each variable would be presented with statistical background.

The section 4.2 briefly describes the descriptive statistical analysis of Customer Satisfaction,

Internal Delays for Authorizations, Supplier Selection and Payment Delays. This was further

elaborated by showing the histograms of Customer Satisfaction, Internal Delays for

Authorizations, Supplier Selection and Payment Delays using survey data.

The section 4.3 briefly describes the analysis of Customer Satisfaction, Internal Delays for

Authorizations, Supplier Selection and Payment Delays. The factor analysis was used to identify

the factors that affect Customer Satisfaction, the co-relation analysis was used to identify the

behavioral and contextual situation of customers and chi-square and regression methods were

used to identify the significant relationship between Customer Satisfaction, Internal Delays for

Authorizations, Supplier Selection and Payment Delays. A hypothesis testing also carried out to

prove the pre determined hypothesis validity as well.

Thesection 4.4 briefly describes the chapter summary by illustrating the various analysis of data

received from the user questionnaires.


2/15

4.2 Descriptive Statistical Analysis

Internal Delays for Authorizations

Table 4.1

INTERNAL AUTHORIZATION DELAYS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid 3.8 11 11.0 11.0 11.0

4.0 55 55.0 55.0 66.0

4.2 21 21.0 21.0 87.0

4.4 13 13.0 13.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

This above Table 4.1 suggests that most of the customers are agreed for that there is an internal

authorization delay in the organization. The frequency level over 4.0 is the satisfied level and it

shows that 89 people are agreed to the above variable.

Table 4.2

INTERNAL AUTHORIZATION DELAYS

N Valid 100

Missing 0

Mean 4.072

Mode 4.000

Std. Deviation 0.169

Skewness 0.553

Kurtosis -0.256

Minimum 3.800

Maximum 4.400


3/15

Figure 4.1

Supplier SelectionTable 4.3

This above Table 4.3 suggests that most of the customers are agreed with the fact that there is a

supplier selection process problem. The frequency level over 4.0 is the satisfied level and it

shows that all the people (100) are agreed to this independent variable.

SUPPLIER SELECTION CONFLICTS

Frequency Percent Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 4.0 63 63.0 63.0 63.0

4.2 20 20.0 20.0 83.0

4.4 17 17.0 17.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0


4/15

Table 4.4

Figure 4.2

Statistics

SUPPLIER SELECTION CONFLICTS

N Valid 100

Missing 0

Mean 4.108

Mode 4.000


Skewness 1.011

Kurtosis -0.556

Minimum 4.000

Maximum 4.400


5/15

Payment Delays

Table 4.5

PAYMENT DELAYS


Percent

Valid 3.8 13 13.0 13.0 13.0

4.0 57 57.0 57.0 70.0

4.2 17 17.0 17.0 87.0

4.4 13 13.0 13.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

This above Table 4.5 suggests that most of the customers are agreed with the fact that there is a

payment delay in procurement department. The frequency level over 4.0 is the satisfied level and

it shows that 87 people are agreed to this variable as well.

Table 4.6

PAYMENT DELAYS

N Valid 100Missing 0

Mean 4.060

Mode 4.000


Skewness 0.645

Kurtosis -0.127

Minimum 3.800

Maximum 4.400


6/15

Figure 4.3

Customer Satisfaction

Table 4.7

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION


Percent

Valid 4.67 37 37.0 37.0 37.0

5.00 63 63.0 63.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

This above Table 4.7 suggests that most of the customers are affected by procurement

management process in the organization. The frequency level over 4.0 is the satisfied level and it

shows that all the people (100) are affected by the procurement management process that directly

influences their individual satisfaction levels.


7/15

Table 4.8

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

N Valid 100

Missing 0Mean 4.8767

Mode 5.0000


Skewness -0.547

Kurtosis -1.736

Minimum 4.670

Maximum 5.000

Figure 4.4


8/15

4.3 Inferential Statistical Analysis

Correlation Coefficient

Table 4.9

The correlation matrix is shown below with the values of all the variables.

The correlation variables have been explained under Correlation Matrix. The above table shows

that CS has a negative correlation (-0.754**

) with IA indicating that if authorization delays

increase the customer satisfaction will be decreased. The significance level remains at 0.01

levels. Likewise, the relationship of CS and SS, PD also significantly and negatively connected

at 0.01 levels.

Testing of Hypothesis

In this study, the researcher introduced 3 hypotheses. The Bivariate correlations of all the

hypotheses at 0.01 levels of significance are shown as follows.

TABLE 4.9

Correlation Matrix

IA SS PD CS

IA 0.844**

0.919**

-0.754**

SS 0.844**

0.806**

-0.919**

PD 0.919**

0.806**

-0.773**

CS -0.754

**-0.919

**-0.773

**

N = 100


9/15

Table 4.8

The first, second and third hypothesis and the null hypothesis are as follows.

H1 There is a negative co-relation exists between internal authorization time and customer

satisfaction.

H01 There is a positive co-relation exists between internal authorization time and customer

satisfaction.

H2 There is a negative co-relation exists between supplier selection of goods and customer

satisfaction.

H02 There is a positive co-relation exists between supplier selection of goods and customer

satisfaction.

Correlations

INTERNAL

AUTHORIZATION

DELAYS

SUPPLIER

SELECTION

PAYMENT

DELAYS

CUSTOMER

SATISFATION

INTERNAL

AUTHORIZATIO

N DELAYS

Pearson

Correlation

1 0.844**

0.919**

-0.754*

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000

N 100 100 100 100

SUPPLIER

SELECTION

Pearson

Correlation

0.844**

1 0.806**

-0.919*

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000

N 100 100 100 100PAYMENT

DELAYS

Pearson

Correlation

0.919**

0.806**

1 -0.773*

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000

N 100 100 100 100

CUSTOMER

SATISFATION

Pearson

Correlation

-0.754**

-0.919**

-0.773**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000

N 100 100 100 100

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).


10/15

H3 There is a negative co-relation exists between supplier payment delays and customersatisfaction.

H03 There is a positive co-relation exists between supplier payment delays and customer

satisfaction.

Regression Analysis

Table 4.9

Table 4.10

Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 7.808 0.258 30.238 7.54e-201 ***

INTERNAL

AUTHORIZATION

DELAYS

-0.720 0.063 -0.754 -11.361 6.55e-030 ***

a. Dependent Variable: CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Model Summaryb

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 0.754a

0.568 0.564 0.106

a. Predictors: (Constant), INTERNAL AUTHORIZATION DELAYS

b. Dependent Variable: CUSTOMER SATISFATION


11/15

Regression Equation

CS = 7.8080.720IA

As per the equation above, it takes a negative value to say that when an authorization delay

occurs inside the organization, the customer satisfaction gets increased. The P value of the same

is 6.55e-030 *** and that is below the rejection level of 0.01. Therefore, H1 is accepted and H01

is rejected with 0.01 level of significance. Therefore, it can be assumed that there is a positive

correlation exists between authorization delays and customer satisfaction.

Figure 4.4


12/15

Table 4.11

Model Summaryb

Model R R Square Adjusted RSquare

Std. Error ofthe Estimate

1 0.919a

0.844 0.842 0.064

a. Predictors: (Constant), SUPPLIER SELECTION

b. Dependent Variable: CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Table 4.12

Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 8.835 0.172 51.323 0.0000 ***

SUPPLIERSELECTION

-0.964 0.042 -0.919 -23.011 3.61e-117 ***


Regression Equation

CS = 8.835 - 0.964SS

As per the equation above, it takes a negative value to say that when a supplier selection problem

occurs inside the organization, the customer satisfaction gets decreased. The P value of the same

is 3.61e-117 *** and that is below the rejection level of 0.01. Therefore, H2 is accepted and H02

is rejected with 0.01 level of significance. Therefore, it can be assumed that there is a negative

correlation exists between supplier selection and customer satisfaction.


13/15

Figure 4.5

Table 4.13

Model Summaryb

Model R R Square Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 0.773a

0.598 0.594 0.103

a. Predictors: (Constant), PAYMENTDELAYS

b. Dependent Variable: CUSTOMERSATISFACTION


14/15

Table 4.14

Coefficientsa

Model UnstandardizedCoefficients

StandardizedCoefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 7.834 0.245 31.960 3.95e-224 ***

PAYMENT

DELAYS

-0.728 0.060 -0.773 -12.075 1.44e-033 ***


Figure 4.6


15/15

Table 4.15

The summary of the hypothesis testing is as follows.

Hypothesis P Value Remarks

H1 There is a negative co-relation exists between internalauthorization time and customer satisfaction 6.55e-030 *** Accepted

H2 There is a negative co-relation exists between supplier selection

of goods and customer satisfaction

3.61e-117 *** Accepted

H3 There is a negative co-relation exists between supplier paymentdelays and customer satisfaction

1.44e-033 *** Accepted

As per the above analysis, all hypotheses have been accepted based on the level of 0.01**

significance.

4.4 Chapter Summary

This chapter was initiated by analyzing the samples which were under consideration. The

demographics of the data samples, distribution of questionnaire and the final response were

presented in a table and a graphical format. The responses obtained for each variable was then

illustrated. The composition of the respondents was then briefly introduced. A detailed

illustration of responses according to the different variables was given, with supporting statistical

analysis.

The descriptive analysis of Customer Satisfaction, Internal Delays for Authorizations, Supplier

Selection and Payment Delays was elaborated through a frequency tables and a histograms. Then

by using SPSS as a statistical tool the analysis of Customer Satisfaction, Internal Delays for

Authorizations, Supplier Selection and Payment Delays was done by using factor, cluster and

chi-squire methods. The above three methods were broadly described by using tables and charts

having comparisons with each factors and clusters.

Finally all findings were presented in a summarized format and the hypothesis testing also has

been carried out in a structural manner.

Anuruddha - analysis.docx

Documents

Transcript of Anuruddha - analysis.docx