study on SHG in rural market
Transcript of study on SHG in rural market
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
1/60
1
CHAPTER 1
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. RESEARCH BACKGROUND
Commercial revolution and industrial revolution in the late 18th and early 19th centuries
have resulted in many benefits to the salver of Indian consumers. Increased competition results
in increased availability of goods at comparatively lower prices. Now goods produced all over
the world become available to the consumers. But what is the matter of consideration is that in
the old economic order the quality and kind of goods produced and the prices charged for them
were determined by custom and tradition which had behind them the sanction of the community.
But in the market economy, the consumer ceased to enjoy this protection. The consumers are
enough aware of market conditions and able to assess the quality and properties of product. The
fact which put him at a comparatively disadvantageous position as a buyer, nowadays, is that he
is often misinformed and misguided by the sellers, who had large resources at their disposal.
There exists an increasing tendency among producers and sellers to come together and form
monopolies which restrict supply to raise prices. To protect the Indian consumers the consumer
movement has been started in India in the year 1930 by a follower of Mahatma Gandhi. As the
height of Gandhi's campaign for freedom from colonial rule, India experienced a registered
consumer organization, for the first time, in Chennai. And the enactment of the Consumer
Protection Act in 1986 had provided the momentum for the consumer movement in India to
bloom. The Consumer Protection Act 1986 of India explicitly called for the protection of not
only those who could afford to purchase goods and services in the market place but also
consumers from rural India who earn an insufficient living.
The term micro finance sometimes is used interchangeably with the term micro credit.
However while micro credit refers to purveyance of loans in small quantities, the term
microfinance has a broader meaning covering in its ambit other financial services like saving,
insurance etc.
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
2/60
2
The essential features of the approach are to provide financial services through the groups
of individuals, formed either in joint liability or co-obligation mode. Basically groups can be of
two types:
Self Help Groups (SHGs): The group in this case does financial intermediation on behalf of the
formal institution. This is the predominant model followed in India.
Grameen Groups:In this model, financial assistance is provided to the individual in a group by
the formal institution on the strength of groups assurance. In other words, individual loans are
provided on the strength of joint liability/co obligation. This microfinance model was initiated by
Bangladesh Grameen Bank and is being used by some of the Micro Finance Institutions (MFIs)
in our country.
Self-Help Group is a small voluntary association of poor people preferably from the same
socio-economic back drop. The micro-credit given to them makes them enterprising; It can be
allwomen group, all-men group or even a mixed group. However, it has been the experience that
womens groups perform better in all the important activities of SHGs. Self Help Groups or
SHGs represent a unique approach to financial intermediation. The approach combines access to
low-cost financial services with a process of self management and development for the women
who are SHG members. SHGs are formed and supported usually by NGOs or (increasingly) by
Government agencies. Linked not only to banks but also to wider development programmes,
SHGs are seen to confer many benefits, both economic and social. SHGs enable women to grow
their savings and to access the credit which banks are increasingly willing to lend. SHGs can also
be community platforms from which women become active in village affairs, stand for local
election or take action to address social or community issues.
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
3/60
3
1.2. IDENTIFIED PROBLEM
The marketers are trying with more innovative distribution methods such as Project
Shakti, Choupal Sagar, GODREJ Aadhaar, Hariyali Kisaan Bazaar. The project shakti
promoted by Hindustan Unilever (HUL) is considered as the most cost effective distribution
model. HUL mainly focus this model only in the selected area of the country. HUL markets the
product in rural through Self Help Group (SHG). Having a huge potential available in this
organized model it has to pass through its own problems like low income, resistance from local
shopkeepers, duplicates, caste feelings etc. Hence it is necessary to find out the viability in
marketing products through self help groups.
1.3. NEED FOR THE STUDY
This project studies Self Help Groups (SHGs) as Potential Channel Partner for Rural
Markets in Cuddalore district. This study would help to the rural areas are consuming a large
quantity of industrial and urban manufactured products. In this context, a special marketing
strategy, namely, rural marketing has emerged. Rural markets, as part of any economy, have
untapped potential. There are several difficulties confronting the effort to fully explore rural
markets. The concept of rural markets in India is still in evolving shape, and the sector posesa variety of challenges. Distribution costs and non-availability of retail outlets are major
problems faced by the marketers. The success of a brand in the Indian rural market is as
unpredictable as rain. Many brands, which should have been successful, have failed
miserably.
1.4. OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE
1.4.1. Objectives
The objectives of the study include:
1. To study the profile of SHG members and their family background.2. To identify the SHGs and its members involved in marketing of traditional products and
non-traditional products.
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
4/60
4
3. To assess the shift of SHGs from traditional to Non-traditional trading.4. To find out the problems faced by SHGs in marketing products5. To find out the potential for marketing multiple products and services through SHGs
1.4.2. Scope
This project is tried to extend marketing plans that they use in urban areas to the rural
markets. The unique consumption patterns, tastes, and needs of the rural consumers should
be analyzed at the product planning stage so that they match the needs of the rural people.
1.5. DELIVERABLES
Distribution methods practiced by the marketer Number of SHG members involved traditional products and non-traditional products. Number of SHG members shifted from traditional products to non-traditional products Identifies the nature of problem faced by SHGs Potential for marketing multiple products and services
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
5/60
5
CHAPTER 2
2. LITERATURE SURVEY
2.1. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Prahalad, C. K., & Hammond, A. (2003) Stated that misconceptions and inaccurate
assumptions exist about business opportunities and profitability at the bottom of the economic
pyramid. While incomes average only US $2,000 per year, there are four billion people in this
sector. Thus, these authors argue, when multinational corporations (MNCs) provide basic goods
and services that reduce costs to the poor and help improve their standard of living (while
generating an acceptable return on investment) the results benefit everyone. Further, by serving
the poor, business can gain new sources of rapid revenue growth, greater efficiencies with cost
reduction initiatives for the MNC, which also translate to increased purchasing power for the
local consumers, as well as access to innovation. Strategies for MNCs to profitably expand their
businesses and serve the worlds poor are as follows:
Expand the understanding of managers about the bottom of the pyramid(BOP) markets
Make structural changes within companies Create venture groups and internal investment funds Establish business development task forces Reach out to external partners (entrepreneurs, NGOs, community groups, and so on)
Julie Thekkudan and Rajesh Tandon(2009) research analyses Project Shakti, a Hindustan
Unilever Limited initiative (HUL), to answer questions on womens livelihoods and their
identities, and if following this model of distribution globally branded products provides a
sustainable source of income.How do these women claim their rights in a global marketplace,and are these kinds of initiatives, when linked with the companys core business, beneficial to
both parties
Gupta and Rajshekar (2005) argue that, for most companies, rural India has remained an
abstract concept. Over the years, HUL has defined what competitive marketing is all about. Its
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
6/60
6
distribution system has been the envy of every other marketing organisation in the country.
HULs much-admired distribution machinery was directly servicing less than a fifth of Indias
villages. This was the fallout of uneconomical last-mile logistics. The business generated by
retailers in these half a million villages was less than that incurred by the company to service
them. That meant HULcould not reach out to nearly 87 per cent of Indias villages, which have a
population of 2,000 or less Retailers in these villages relied on the wholesale channel easily
one of the most cost-effective mass distribution systems. So products did get through, but only
fast-moving brands without a direct distribution system in place, Lever knew that only a handful
of its brands would reach rural shop shelves.
Aishwarya (2009) argued that poor households should be perceived as producers and not
just consumers. The BoP consists primarily of small-scale producers: 57 per cent of Indias
labour force is self-employed, 29 per cent of Indias labour force consists of workers who
provide casual labour. The ToP, or the rich, are brand conscious consumers, who can be seen as
a viable niche market for BoP produced goods and services. Therefore, new ways of accessing
ToP markets should be discovered. She argued that the surplus is still at the top of the pyramid.
The real way to make profits is in production and not consumption.
The traditional business models of the formal financial companies are unfeasible and
costly in providing appropriate reach to the unbanked population in remote areas directly for
banking, insurance and other financial services and products, and as a result, a mere 5.2% of
Indian villages have a bank branch (Kochhar, 2009).
According to Frost and Sullivan (2008) The Financial inclusion (FI) quotient of a
country is recognized as a key determinant to gauge that country's overall economic and social
development. Even in developed financial markets there are concerns about those excluded from
the banking system, especially, migrant workers. The barriers to access formal banking system
have been identified as relating to culture, education (financial literacy), gender, proof of
identity, remoteness of residence, income and assets, etc. (Rangarajan, 2008).
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
7/60
7
Branchless banking is the use of technology, such as mobile phones and bank cards, for
the conduct of financial transactions electronically and remotely. The use of third party outlets as
agents for the financial services provider allows customers to use financial services without
going to bank branches. The financial services provider is backed by a government-licensed
financial institution. Besides transactional services, branchless banking provides basic cash
deposit and withdrawal (Ivatury and Mas, 2008).
Ultimately debt can produce a gender initiated economic vulnerability for poor rural
households, irrespective of whether the work is wage based or a genuine small
business (Johnson, 2005). Here self-limiting is also a form of channeling. This is because the
narrow experience pool of the SHG and available investment opportunities set out at higher
levels in a micro-finance project can mean the use of debt by the rural poor is focused in
common ways. The very success of SHGs then tends to individually replicate the same activities.
The most prominent SHG micro-finance project within rural India is part of the Indira
Kranti Patham program. Formerly called Velugu, this is a World Bank sponsored movement
focusing specifically on the empowerment of women and initiated in 2000. Velugu, in turn, grew
out of the Indian government program Development for Women and Children in Rural Areas
(DWCRA). DWCRA began in 1982-83 as a gender offshoot of the National Integrated Rural
Development Program of 1979 (Deshmukh- Ranadive 2004).
Ganesamurthy, V.S and Krishnan, M.K (2004) studies the credit utilization pattern of self
help group Gopisetti, Rambabu and Venkateshwarlu, (2008) analysed the product anagement of
self help group in Andhra Pradesh. The study revealed that group production is more preferred in
higher income group as compared to the other income groups. The production business is mainly
linking up with their cost and community back ground. They are repaying their loan at right time.
Loganathan, P (2004) had analysed the state wise performance of linkage of SHG, with banks in
terms of members SHGs linked with banks assessed to the extent of involvement banks in the
programs. It revealed that Tamil Nadu is one of the top three states in respect of linkage of SHGs
with banks.
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
8/60
8
Shanthi, G. and Dhanalakshmi, C (2005) in their article, based on the survey method of
multi stage sampling, stated that participation in group activities leads to changed self image,
enhanced access to new information, broad knowledge about resource availability and
negotiation with government officials. Reaching rural markets with products and services is an
enormous task because of the geographical spread of the market and the widely dispersed
population.
The distribution of products and services to this market therefore involves high cost and
effort. The marketers of consumer non-durables use the fixed location retail shop to reach the
rural consumer. The high costs for marketers in servicing the rural retail shops and the non-
availability of fixed location retail shops have necessitated many marketing organizations to
explore alternative channels to reach rural consumers. The alternative channels that marketers
use include the haats (periodic markets), Self-help groups (SHGs), IT-kiosks, mobile traders,
network marketing/ agents etc (Velayudhan, 2007).
Makumbe et al (2005) found that microfinance has a positive impact on decision making
in Tanzania, Hulma and Mosley (1996) found growth of microfinance borrowers in Indonesia,
India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Sridhar Krishna (2004) advocated for giving legal status of
SHGs. Nataraju et al (2005) indicated that more financial support does not help the members and
recommended that they should be provided with institutional support in Karnataka.
Rajendran et al (2010) concluded that there is s definite improvement of psychological,
economical, social; and managerial skills.Among the SHG leaders in Vellore district of
Tamilnadu.
The focus of literature, mainly written in the post liberalization period, is on highlighting
potential of vast rural market and providing description of a few cases of commercial
organization n of rural areas. The literature has uncritically borrowed theories, framework and
concept from the mainstream marketing discipline, which has shifted the growth of the subject as
an independent field of academic investigation. There is an urgent need to build a distinctive
perspective and a sound theoretical base for rural marketing, which would create its own
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
9/60
9
concepts, frameworks, theories and body of knowledge. The issue needs immediate attention of
the researcher in rural marketing.
Nagayya (2000) stated that there has been a massive expansion in the formal credit
delivery network in the last three decades and there is an acceptable gap in financing the genuine
poor, especially in remote rural area.
Sabyasachi Das (2003) reported on the functioning of Self-Help Groups and microcredit.
It included social, economic, political and spiritual development of the poorer section of the
society. NGOs gave some training to the SHGs for awareness building, entrepreneurship and
skill training and some help in arranging inputs, and marketing, introduced saving and internal
lending, helped in the maintenance of accounts and linked them with the banks for credit
requirements.
Shetty (2002) reported on the impact of Rural Self Help groups and other forms of
microfinancing.
Solanki (2002) identified technologies for rural development in the directory of rural
development published by National Institute of Rural Development, Hyderabad which is a
unique effort in assembling the detailed information of 100 technologies developed by various R
& D institutions/ agencies. This reference book will help the policy makers and technologists in
analyzing and implementing the practical approaches. A large number of these technologies are
being transferred free of cost, with a few on consultancy basis while some of them need license
to enable their transfer.
Tripathy (2004) explained economic empowerment through income generating activities
through self help groups and also explained its importance in education, mid -day meals scheme,
health, agriculture and allied activities, community action and sustainable development and rural
sanitation.
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
10/60
10
The SHGs have been found to be an effective tool of micro-credit delivery for women
empowerment and rural development (Desai, 2000; Puhazhendhi, 2000). There is several success
stories of how SHGs have benefited the poverty-ridden people in the rural areas in emerging
empowered and how lending to SHGs have made loss-making branches of banks to turn around.
Although SHGs have come to stay there are some germane issues that need to be sorted out.
2.2. RESEARCH GAP
According to the literature reviewed the rural marketing has immense potency in selling
fast moving consumer goods. The role of SHGs in selling consumer products in rural areas has a
huge potency. Some SHG members facing local resistance from the local shopkeepers. In order
to catch the rural market further study is to be needed to formulate the best marketing strategies
in the rural areas. The literature has uncritically borrowed theories, framework and concept from
the mainstream marketing discipline, which has shifted the growth of the subject as an
independent field of academic investigation. There is an urgent need to build a distinctive
perspective and a sound theoretical base for rural marketing,
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
11/60
11
CHAPTER 3
3. METHODOLOGIES
3.1. TYPE OF PROJECT
The study will be Exploratory. The study needs to explore the marketing potential of
FMCG of Shakti products through SHG members as business channel partners in Cuddalore
district. It will be supported with primary data collected using questionnaires. The study provides
clear specification of who, what, when, why and how aspects of their search. It involves more
specific hypothesis and testing of them through statistical INTERPRETATION techniques.
3.2. TARGET RESPONDENTS
The primary data would be collected from SHG members having Shakti dealership in
cuddalore district and also from the rural customers.
3.3. ASSUMPTIONS
The SHG members of Shakti dealership are assumed to be aware of selling FMCG of
Shakti products.
3.4. PROPOSED SAMPLING METHODS
3.4.1. Sampling Unit
The responses will be obtained from SHG members who are having the Shakti
dealership.
3.4.2. Sample Size
A total of 100 samples were chosen for the study.
3.4.3. Sampling Technique
The sample size of the study consists of 40 SHG Shakti member and 60 rural customers
who belong to different age and villages of cuddalore district. They will be selected by way of
Convenience sampling method. It is a non probability sampling method, in which samples are
drawn at convenience of the researcher or interviewer.
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
12/60
12
3.5. DATA PROCESSING
Depending on the nature of the information to be gathered, different methods are used to
conduct the assessment: forms for gathering data from different kind of respondents such as
Working men and women, House wives, and farmers surveys/interviews to gather information
from youth, community residents, and others; For purposes of the data-collection process, the
following discussion provides information on the types of data-collection tools most commonly
used.
3.5.1. Primary Data Collection
Primary research entails the use of immediate data. It is the data that has been recorded
or observed by researcher for the first time to their knowledge. Primary data is more
accommodating as it shows latest information.
Questionnaireo A questionnaire is simply a formalized set of questions for eliciting information.
In this questionnaire was essentially structured in nature and includes multiple
choice and some open ended questions.
o A sample used for the questionnaire is available in the Appendix 1. Secondary Data Collection
o Secondary data may be described as those data that have been compiled by someagency other than user. It is the information that relates to a past period. Hence,
it lacks aptness and therefore, it has unsatisfactory value. Secondary data is
collected and analyzed by the organization to convene the requirements of
various research objectives.
3.6. Types of Analysis
3.6.1. Percentage Analysis
Percentage analyzing refers to special kind of ratio. Percentage analysis is used in
making comparison between two or more fields of data. Percentage is used to describe
relationship.
This tool will be helpful to rank different selling techniques of insurance products.
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
13/60
13
3.6.2. Statistical Analysis
1. KRUSKAL WALLIS TEST
The Kruskal-Wallis test is a nonparametric (distribution free) test, which is used to
compare three or more groups of sample data. Kruskal-Wallis Test is used when assumptions of
ANOVA are not met. ANOVA is a statistical data analysis technique that is used when the
independent variable groups are more than two. In ANOVA, we assume that distribution of each
group should be normally distributed. In Kruskal-Wallis Test, we do not assume any assumption
about the distribution. So Kruskal-Wallis Test is a distribution free test. If normality
assumptions are met, then the Kruskal-Wallis Test is not as powerful as ANOVA. Kruskal-
Wallis Test is also an improvement over the Sign test.
2. CHI-SQUARE TEST
Chi-square is a statistical test commonly used to compare observed data with data we
would expect to obtain according to a specific hypothesis. For example, if, according to Mendel's
laws, you expected 10 of 20 offspring from a cross to be male and the actual observed number
was 8 males, then you might want to know about the "goodness to fit" between the observed and
expected. Were the deviations (differences between observed and expected) the result of chance,
or were they due to other factors. How much deviation can occur before you, the investigator,
must conclude that something other than chance is at work, causing the observed to differ from
the expected. The chi-square test is always testing what scientists call the null hypothesis, which
states that there is no significant difference between the expected and observed result.
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
14/60
14
CHAPTER 4
4. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
4.1. PERCENT ANALYSIS
TABLE 4.1: VILLAGE POPULATION
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows population of the respondents area. Around 5% of the respondents were
residing below 200 persons in their village, 67.5% of them resides between 200 to 500 and
27.5% of them above 500.
FIGURE 4.1: VILLAGE POPULATION
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Below 200 200 to 500 Above 500
Percentage
Population
Population No. of Respondents Percentage
Below 200 2 5.0
200 to 500 27 67.5
Above 500 11 27.5
Total 40 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
15/60
15
TABLE 4.2: TOTAL NUMBER OF FAMILIES
Total No. of Families No. of Respondents Percentage
Below 100 28 70.0
Above 100 12 30.0
Total 40 100.0
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the total number of families in the respondents village. Around 70% of
the respondents village having below 100 families and 30% of them having above 100 families
in their village.
FIGURE 4.2: TOTAL NUMBER OF FAMILIES
0
1020
30
40
50
60
70
Below 100 Above 100
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
16/60
16
TABLE 4.3: AGE OF THE RESPONDENTS
Age No. of Respondents Percentage
Below40 yrs 33 82.5
Above 40 Yrs 7 17.5
Total 40 100.0
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the age of the respondent. Around 82.5% of the respondents were below
40 years. And 17.5% were above 40 years.
FIGURE 4.3: AGE OF THE RESPONDENTS
0
20
40
60
80
100
Below 40yrs Above 40yrs
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
17/60
17
TABLE 4.4: NUMBER OF YEARS ASSOCIATED WITH THE GROUP
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the number of years the SHG members associated with the group.
2.5% of the members were associated with the group for 1 year. 22.5% of the members were
associated with the group for 2 years. 32.5% of the members were associated with the group
for 3 years. 35% of the members were associated with the group for 4 years. 5% of the
members were associated with the group for 5 years. 2.5% of the members were associated
with the group for 6 years.
FIGURE 4.4: NUMBER OF YEARS ASSOCIATED WITH THE GROUP
0
10
20
30
40
1 2 3 4 5 6
%o
fassociationwiththegroup
No. of Years associated with the group
Number of years association of the member with the
group
Number of year associated
with the group
No. of Respondents Percentage
1 1 2.52 9 22.53 13 32.54 14 35.05 2 5.06 1 2.5
Total 40 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
18/60
18
TABLE 4.5: RELIGION OF THE RESPONDENT
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the religion of the respondents. Around 92.5% of the respondents
were belonging to Hindu and around 7.5% respondents were Christians.
FIGURE4.5: RELIGION OF THE RESPONDENT
0
20
40
60
80
100
Hindu Christian
Percentage
Religion
Religion No. of Respondents Percentage
Hindu 37 92.5
Christian 3 7.5
Total 40 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
19/60
19
TABLE 4.6: CASTE OF THE RESPONDENT
Caste No. of Respondents Percentage
BC 9 22.5
MBC 19 47.5
SC 12 30.0
Total 40 100.0
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the Caste of the respondents. Around 22.5% of the respondents were
belonging to BC, 47.5% respondents were MBC, and 47.5% respondents were SC.
FIGURE 4.6: CASTE OF THE RESPONDENT
0
10
20
30
40
50
BC MBC SC
Percentage
Caste
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
20/60
20
TABLE 4.7: MARITAL STATUS OF THE RESPONDENT
Marital status No. of Respondents Percentage
Married 40 100.0
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the Marital Status of the respondents. All the respondents were married.
FIGURE 4.7: MARITAL STATUS OF THE RESPONDENT
0
20
40
60
80
100
Married Unmarried
Percentage
Marital status
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
21/60
21
TABLE 4.8: OCCUPATION OF THE RESPONDENTS HUSBAND
Occupation of the husband No. of Respondents Percentage
Agriculture 7 17.5
Farm Worker 8 20
Business 10 25
Government
Employee1
2.5
Private 13 32.5
Others 1 2.5
Total 40 100
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the Occupation of the Husband of the respondents. Around 17.5% of the
respondents were agriculture, 20% respondents were Farm Workers, 25% were Business, 2.5%
was Government Employee, 32.5% were private employees, and 2.5% were doing Other Jobs.
FIGURE 4.8: OCCUPATION OF THE RESPONDENTS HUSBAND
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Percentage
Occupation
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
22/60
22
TABLE 4.9: NUMBER OF MEMBERS IN THE FAMILY
No. of members in the
familyNo. of Respondents Percentage
3 6 15.0
4 10 25.0
5 7 17.5
6 9 22.5
7 7 17.5
10 1 2.5
Total 40 100.0
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the Number of Members of the Family of the respondents. Around 15%
of the respondents were having 3 members in the family. 25% having 4 members, 17.5% were
having 5 members, 22.5% having 6 members, 17.5% having 7 members and 2.5% of the
respondents were having 10 members in the family.
FIGURE 4.9: NUMBER OF MEMBERS IN THE FAMILY
0
5
10
15
20
25
3 4 5 6 7 10
Percentage
No. of family members
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
23/60
23
TABLE 4.10: NUMBER OF DEPENDENTS
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the Number of dependents of the Family of the respondents. Around
22.5% of the respondents were having 2 dependents. 27.5% having 3 dependents, 20% were
having 4 dependents, 25% were having 5 dependents and 5% were having 6 dependents in the
family.
FIGURE 4.10: NUMBER OF DEPENDENTS
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
2 3 4 5 6
Percentage
No. of dependents
Number of dependents No. of Respondents Percentage
2 9 22.53 11 27.5
4 8 20.0
5 10 25.0
6 2 5.0
Total 40 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
24/60
24
TABLE 4.11: EDUCATIONAL STATUS OF THE RESPONDENT
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the Educational Status of the respondents. Around 65% of the
respondents were having Formal education and 35% were Non-Formal education,
FIGURE 4.11: EDUCATIONAL STATUS OF THE RESPONDENT
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Formal Non-formal
Percentage
Educational Status
Educational Status No. of Respondents Percentage
Formal Education 26 65.0Non - Formal Education 14 35.0
Total 40 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
25/60
25
TABLE 4.12: OCCUPATIONAL STATUS OF THE RESPONDENT
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the Occupational Status of the respondents. Around 32.5% of the
respondents were Unemployed, 10% were Wage earners, 50% were Assisting Husbands work
and 7.5% were doing other occupations.
FIGURE 4.12: OCCUPATIONAL STATUS OF THE RESPONDENT
0
10
20
30
40
50
Unemployed Wage Earners Assisting
Husband's
work
Others
Percentage
Occupational Status
Occupational Status No. of Respondents Percentage
Unemployed 13 32.5
Wage Earners 4 10.0
Assisting Husband's Work 20 50.0
Others 3 7.5
Total 40 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
26/60
26
TABLE 4.13: INTIAL INVESTMENT MADE BY THE RESPONDENT
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the initial investment of the respondent. Around 70% of the respondentsinvested below 2000 rupees and 30% of them invested above 2000 rupees.
FIGURE 4.13: INTIAL INVESTMENT MADE BY THE RESPONDENT
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Below Rs.2000 Above Rs.2000
Percentage
Initial Investment
Initial Investment No. of Respondents Percentage
Below Rs.2000 28 70.0
Above Rs 2000 12 30.0
Total 40 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
27/60
27
TABLE 4.14: SOURCE OF CAPITAL
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:The above table shows the Source of Capital of the respondents. Around 75% of the respondents
were getting source of capital from the Bank and 25% were from their own fund.
FIGURE 4.14: SOURCE OF CAPITAL
0
20
40
60
80
Bank Own Fund
Percentage
Source of Captical
Source of Capital No. of Respondents Percentage
Bank 30 75.0
Own Fund 10 25.0
Total 40 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
28/60
28
TABLE 4.15: RESPONDENTS COMFORT WITH THE BUSINESS
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the Business Comfort of the respondents. Around 97.5% responded Yes
and 2.5% were responded No.
FIGURE 4.15: RESPONDENTS COMFORT WITH THE BUSINESS
0
20
40
60
80
100
Yes No
Percentage
Comfort with the business
Business Comfort No. of Respondents Percentage
Yes 39 97.5
No 1 2.5
Total 40 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
29/60
29
TABLE 4.16: ENGAGING FAMILY MEMBERS IN BUSINESS
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows family members engagement in their business.100% of the respondent
were answered Positive.
FIGURE 4.16: ENGAGING FAMILY MEMBERS IN BUSINESS
0
20
40
60
80
100
Yes No
Percentage
Engaging family members
Engaging family members No. of Respondents Percentage
Yes 40 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
30/60
30
TABLE 4.17: FAMILY MEMBERS SUPPORT
Business support No. of Respondents Percentage
Husband 34 85.0
Daughter 2 5.0
Father 2 5.0
Daughter-in-law 2 5.0
Total 40 100.0
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the supporter of the respondents family for their business. 85% of
members getting support from their Husband. 5% were from their Daughter, 5% were from their
Father and 5% were from their Daughter-in-law.
FIGURE 4.17: FAMILY MEMBERS SUPPORT
0102030405060708090
Percentage
Business support
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
31/60
31
TABLE 4.18: PLACE OF SELLING PRODUCTS
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:The above table shows the where the respondents sell their Products. Around 60% of the
respondents were having Separate Shop and 40% of them having selling in the house itself.
FIGURE 4.18: PLACE OF SELLING PRODUCTS
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Separate Shop In house
Percentage
Place of selling
Where you sell your products No. of Respondents Percentage
Separate shop 24 60.0
In the house 16 40.0
Total 40 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
32/60
32
TABLE 4.19: AVAILABILITY OF DUPLICATE PRODUCTS IN THE MARKET
Duplicate products No. of Respondents Percentage
Yes 6 15.0
No 34 85.0
Total 40 100.0
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows is there any duplicate for the respondents products. Around 15% of the
respondents answered Yes and 85% of them answered No.
FIGURE 4.19: AVAILABILITY OF DUPLICATE PRODUCTS IN THE MARKET
0
20
40
60
80
100
Yes No
Percentage
Duplicate products
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
33/60
33
TABLE 4.20: ALL THE COMMUNITIES IN THE VILLAGE PURCHASE FROM THE
SHOP
All the communities purchase in the shop No. of Respondents Percentage
Yes 25 62.5
No 15 37.5
Total 40 100.0
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows whether all the communities from their village purchase from their shops.
Around 62.5% of the respondents answered Yes and 37.5% of them answered No.
FIGURE 4.20: ALL THE COMMUNITIES IN THE VILLAGE PURCHASE FROM
THE SHOP
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Yes No
Percentage
All Communities purchase
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
34/60
34
TABLE 4.21: PRODUCTS YOU SOLD BEFORE TAKING SHAKTI
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows what type of product they sold for taking Shakti dealership. Around 30%of the respondents answered selling Traditional Products. 70% of them answered No.
FIGURE 4.21: PRODUCTS YOU SOLD BEFORE TAKING SHAKTI
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Traditional Products No
Percentage
Selling
Before selling Shakti Products No. of Respondents Percentage
Traditional Products 12 30.0
No 28 70.0
Total 40 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
35/60
35
TABLE 4.22: PRODUCTS SOLD BY SHAKTI MEMBERS
Are you dealing only shakti product No. of Respondents Percentage
Only Shakti products 14 35.0
Other products also 26 65.0
Total 40 100.0
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows Are the respondent dealing only Shakti products. Around 35% of the
respondents answered Yes and 65% of them answered No.
FIGURE 4.22: PRODUCTS SOLD BY SHAKTI MEMBERS
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Yes No
Percentage
Product
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
36/60
36
TABLE 4.23: RESISTANCE FROM THE LOCAL SHOP
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:The above table shows 82.5% respondents do not face any resistance from local Shops. Around
17.5% of the respondents answered Yes.
FIGURE 4.23: RESISTANCE FROM THE LOCAL SHOP
0
20
40
60
80
100
Yes No
Percentage
Resistance
Resistance No. of Respondents Percentage
Yes 7 17.5
No 33 82.5
Total 40 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
37/60
37
TABLE 4.24: AVERAGE SALES PER DAY FOR YOUR SHAKTI PRODUCTS
Average Sales No. of Respondents Percentage
High 2 5.0
Moderate 36 90.0
Poor 2 5.0
Total 40 100.0
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the respondents Average sales of Shakti products per day. Around 5% of
them gets High Sales, 90% getting Moderate Sales and 5% of them gets Poor Sales per day.
FIGURE 4.24: AVERAGE SALES PER DAY FOR YOUR SAKTHI PRODUCTS
0
20
40
60
80
100
High Moderate Poor
Percentage
Sales
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
38/60
38
TABLE 4.25: GETTING PROFIT FROM YOUR BUSINESS
Profit From Business No. of Respondents Percentage
Yes 40 100.0
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the respondents profit from their business. 100% of the respondents
answered Yes.
FIGURE 4.25: GETTING PROFIT FROM YOUR BUSINESS
0
20
40
60
80
100
Yes
Percentage
Profit
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
39/60
39
TABLE 4.26: PLACE OF PRODUCT PROCUREMENT
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:The above table shows from where the respondent procuring their products. Around 75% of the
respondents procuring directly from the HUL dealer and 30% of them were directly from the
company.
FIGURE 4.26: PLACE OF PRODUCT PROCUREMENT
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Directly from HUL dealer Directly from the
Company
Percentage
Place
Product Procurement No. of Respondents Percentage
Directly from HUL dealer 28 70.0
Directly from the company 12 30.0
Total 40 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
40/60
40
TABLE 4.27: FREQUENCY OF ORDERS PLACED BY SHG MEMBERS
Frequency of orders No. of Respondents Percentage
Weekly 1 2.5
Fortnightly 9 22.5
Monthly 26 65.0
Based on requirement of the product 4 10.0
Total 40 100.0
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows the respondents frequency of the order from the customer. Around 2.5%
of the respondents getting weekly order, 22.5% of them getting Fortnightly, 65% of them getting
monthly orders and 10% were based on the requirement of the product.
FIGURE 4.27: FREQUENCY OF ORDERS PLACED BY SHG MEMBERS
010203040506070
Weekly Fortnightly Monthly Based on
requirement
of the
product
Percentage
Frequency
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
41/60
41
TABLE 4.28: WAITIG PERIOD FOR PRODUCT DELIVERY
SOURCE= PRIMARY DATA
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows how long the respondents have to wait for their product supply. Around
2.5% of the respondents getting within a day. 67.5% of them getting 2-4 days and 30% of them
getting within a week.
FIGURE 4.28: WAITIG PERIOD FOR PRODUCT DELIVERY
0
10
20
3040
50
60
70
Within a day 2-4 days One week
Percent
age
Waiting Period
Waiting For The Product Supply No. of Respondents Percentage
Within a day 1 2.5
2- 4 days 27 67.5
One week 12 30.0
Total 40 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
42/60
42
RURAL CUSTOMER
TABLE 4.29: DECISION MAKING OF THE RURAL CUSTOMER IN BUYING FMCG
Decision making No. of Respondents Percentage
Family Head 41 68.3
Wife 17 28.3
Daughter 2 3.3
Total 60 100.0
INTREPRETATION:
The above table shows the respondents decision making of the rural customer in buying FMCG.
Around 68.3% of the respondents stated that buying decisions were made by family head. 28.3%
of the respondents stated wife and 3.3% stated as daughter.
FIGURE 4.29: DECISION MAKING OF THE RURAL CUSTOMER IN BUYING
FMCG
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Family Head Wife Daughter
Percentage
Decision Maker
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
43/60
43
TABLE 4.30: OCCASIONS DECISION MADE BY THE RESPONDENT
INTREPRETATION:
The above table shows the respondents decision making of the rural customer in occasion of
buying FMCG. Around 38.3% of the respondents stated that buying decisions always made by
family head. 26.7% of the respondents stated often and 35% stated as sometimes.
FIGURE 4.30: OCCASIONS DECISION MADE BY THE RESPONDENT
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Always Often Sometimes
Percentage
Occasion
Decision occasions No. of respondents Percentage
Always 23 38.3
often 16 26.7
Sometimes 21 35.0
Total 60 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
44/60
44
TABLE 4.31: PURCHASE IN VILLAGE SHOP
INTREPRETATION:
The above table shows the purchase of the respondent in the village shop. Around 95% of the
respondents purchase in Village shop and 5% were not purchasing in the village shop.
FIGURE 4.31: PURCHASE IN VILLAGE SHOP
0
20
40
60
80
100
Yes No
Percentage
Purchase
Village shop No. of Respondents Percentage
yes 57 95.0
No 3 5.0
Total 60 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
45/60
45
TABLE 4.32: PURCHASE FREQUENCY IN THE VILLAGE SHOP
INTREPRETATION:
The above table shows the respondents purchase frequency in the Village shop. Around 78.3%
of the respondents stated daily purchase and 15%, 1.7% and 1.7% of the respondent stated
weekly, monthly and occasionally respectively. 3.3% of them not purchasing in the village
shops.
FIGURE 4.32: PURCHASE FREQUENCY IN THE VILLAGE SHOP
0
20
40
60
80
Percentage
Frequency
Purchase Fequency No. of Respondents Percentage
Daily 47 78.3
Weekly 9 15.0
Monthly 1 1.7
Occasionally 1 1.7
Not Applicable 2 3.3
Total 60 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
46/60
46
TABLE 4.33: PURCHASE IN SHG MEMBERS SHOP
INTREPRETATION:
The above table shows the purchase of the respondent in the SHG members shop. Around 90%
of the respondents purchase in SHG members shop and 10% were not purchasing in the SHGmembers shop.
FIGURE 4.33: PURCHASE IN SHG MEMBERS SHOP
0
20
40
60
80
100
Yes No
Percentage
Purchase
Purchase frequency No. of Respondents Percentage
yes 54 90.0
No 6 10.0
Total 60 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
47/60
47
TABLE 4.34: PURCHASE FREQUENCY IN SHG MEMBERS
INTREPRETATION:
The above table shows the respondents purchase frequency in the SHG members. Around 3.3%
of the respondents stated daily purchase and 3.3%, 53.3% and 31.7% of the respondent stated
weekly, monthly and occasionally respectively. 8.3% of them not purchasing in the SHG
members.
FIGURE 4.34: PURCHASE FREQUENCY IN SHG MEMBERS
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Percentage
Frequency
Purchase frequency No. of Respondents Percentage
Daily 2 3.3
Weekly 2 3.3
Monthly 32 53.3
Occasionally 19 31.7
Not Applicable 5 8.3
Total 60 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
48/60
48
TABLE 4.35: REASON FOR BUYING FROM VILLAGE SHOP
INTREPRETATION:
The above table shows the respondents reason for buying in the village shop. Around 46.7% of
the respondents preference reason was Availability. 8.3% and 40% respondents stated less
price and convenience respectively as the reason for buying in the village shop.
FIGURE 4.35: REASON FOR BUYING FROM VILLAGE SHOP
0
20
40
60
80
Availability Less Price Convenience Not
Applicable
Percentage
Reason
Reason No. of Respondents Percentage
Availability 28 46.7
Less Price 5 8.3
Convenience 24 40.0
Not Applicable 3 5.0
Total 60 100.0
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
49/60
49
TABLE 4.36: REASON FOR BUYING FROM SHG MEMBER
Reason No. of Respondents Percentage
Availability 12 20.0
Less Price 40 66.7
Convenience 2 3.3
Not Applicable 6 10.0
Total 60 100.0
INTREPRETATION:
The above table shows the respondents reason for buying in the SHG member. Around 20% of
the respondents preference reason was Availability. 66.7% and 3.3% respondents stated less
price and convenience respectively as the reason for buying in the SHG member.
FIGURE 4.36: REASON FOR BUYING FROM SHG MEMBER
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Availability Less Price Convenience Not
Applicable
Percentage
Reason
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
50/60
50
4.2.DATA ANALYSIS USING STATISTICAL TOOLS
4.2.1. KRUSKAL WALLIS TEST FOR SHG SHAKTI DEALER CASTE AND
PURCHASE OF ALL COMMUNITIES
Ho: (Null Hypothesis): There exists no significant relationship between caste and
purchase from all communities
H1: (Alternate Hypothesis): There exists significant relationship between caste and
purchase from all communities
TABLE 4.37: CROSS TABULATION- SHG SHAKTI DEALER CASTE AND
PURCHASE OF ALL COMMUNITIES
Caste
Whether all the communities from the Village purchase from the shop?
Total
Yes No
BC 7 2 9MBC 14 5 19SC 4 8 12
Total 25 15 40
Chi-Square Test Value df P value
Pearson Chi-Square 6.266(a) 2 .044
RESULT:
P Value < .05 reject Ho. Hence, there exists significant relationship between caste and
purchase from all communities
INTERPRETATION:
From the result it is clear that there is a significant relationship between Caste and
purchase of all communities.
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
51/60
51
DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICSINITIAL INVESTMENT
Mean 1886.25
Minimum 1000
Maximum 10000
RESULT:
From the above table it is clear that the Maximum initial investment is Rs.10000 and the
minimum is of Rs.1000 and the mean value is 1886.25.
4.2.2. KRUSKAL WALLIS TEST FOR SHG SHAKTI DEALER CASTE AND
PURCHASE OF ALL COMMUNITIES
Ho: (Null Hypothesis): There exists no significant relationship between caste and
purchase from all communities
H1: (Alternate Hypothesis): There exists significant relationship between caste and
purchase from all communities
TABLE 4.38: SHG SHAKTI DEALER CASTE AND PLACE OF SELLING THEIR
PRODUCTS
CasteWhere you sell your products
TotalSeparate shop In house
BC 5 4 9
MBC 13 6 19SC 6 6 12
Total 24 16 40
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
52/60
52
CHI-SQUARE TESTS
Chi-Square Value df P value
Pearson Chi-Square
1.135(a) 2 .567
RESULT:
P Value >.05 Accept Ho. Hence, there exists no significant relationship between caste
and place of selling their products.
INTERPRETATION:
From the result it is clear that there is no significant relationship between Caste and place
of selling their products.
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
53/60
53
CHAPTER 5
5. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
5.1. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
SHAKTI DEALER
Majority (67.5%) of the respondents village population was between 200 to 500 Majority (70%) of respondents families in their village was below 100 Majority (82.5%) of the respondents were below 40 yrs of age 90% of the respondents were associated with the group (SHG) for 2-4yrs Majority (92.5%) of the respondents belongs to Hindu religion Majority (47.5%) of the respondents Caste was MBC 13% of the respondents husband were private employees 97.5% of the respondents family size ranges between 3 to 7 members 95% of the respondents number of dependents in their family was between 3 to 5 Majority (65%) of the respondents were having formal education Majority (50%) of the respondents were assisting their husbands work Majority 70%) of the respondents initial investment was below 2000 rupees in Project
shakti
Majority (75%) of the respondents source of capital was from the bank Majority (97.5%) of the respondents were being comfort in their business The entire family members assisting the respondents business. Majority (85%) of the respondents were getting business support from their husband Majority (60%) of the respondents have separate shops for selling their products Majority (85%) of the respondents stated that there is no duplicate for their product in the
market
Majority (62.5%) of the respondents stated that all the communities in the villagepurchase from their shops
Majority (30%) of the respondents were selling traditional products before taking shaktidealership
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
54/60
54
Majority (65%) of the respondents were selling other than shakti products Majority (82.5%) of the respondents stated that they did not face any resistance from the
local shops
Majority (90%) of the respondents stated that they are getting moderate sales for theirshakti products
All the respondents stated that they are getting profit from their business Majority (70%) of the respondents procuring their products directly from HUL dealer Majority (65%) of the respondents were placed their order on monthly basis Majority (67.5%) of the respondents stated that they required to wait for 2-4 days for
product delivery
RURAL CUSTOMERS
Majority (68.3%) of the respondents stated that decision in buying FMCG was made byFamily head and also majority (38.3%) of them stated that such a decision are always
made by the family heads
Majority (95%) of the respondents stated that they are buying from village shop Majority (78.3%) of the respondents daily purchase FMCG from the from Village shops Majority (53.3%) of the respondents monthly purchase FMCG from the from SHG
members
Majority (46.7%) of the respondents stated that availability is the reason for buyingFMCG from Village shops
Majority (66.7%) of the respondents stated that less price is the reason for buying FMCGfrom SHG members
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
55/60
55
5.2. SUGGESTIONS
Government, NGOs and Corporate can come forward and support for SHG members to sell
their products. By getting support from the government will enhance the SHG members excel
in their business. Effective marketing strategies required to reach the rural markets through
SHGs and by creating awareness programs in rural areas about the Shakti products. Making
the products more freely and easily available to the rural customers. Most of the villagers are
buying the product on daily basis, so huge potential exists for SHG for selling their products
On day today basis. The research findings show that project sakthi dealers are selling
additional products to get additional income. The micro level marketing can be scale up by
adding other non competitor products with the existing HUL products.
5.3. CONCLUSION
Project Shakti is enabling rural families to live with dignity and in better health and hygiene,
education of the children and an overall betterment in living standards. It creates a win-win
partnership between HUL and the rural consumers for mutual benefit and growth. This can
be said as sustainable development in the sphere of business sphere. Project Shakti provides a
powerful example of a business that profits while improving the livelihoods and quality of
life for its customers. Creating more awareness for the use of Shakti products in rural areas
and making the products more easily available to all kind of rural populations will give good
business for Shakti products.
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
56/60
56
APPENDIX - 1
Questionnaire for SHGs- Shakti Dealer
1. Geographical Information:Village Name Population
Total number of families Taluk: District
2. General profile:Name of the SHG:
Name of the member: Age (Completed years):
3. Number of years associated with the group:Religion:
4. Caste: OC/BC/MBC/SC/ST5. Marital status Married Unmarried6. If married, occupation of the husband
Agriculture Farm worker Business Government Employee Private
Others (please specify).
7. Number of members in the family: ____________8. Number of dependent members in the family: __________9. Educational status
Formal education Non formal education
10. Occupational status
Before joining SHGs Unemployed Wage earners Assisting Husbands Work
Others (please specify).
11.What is your initial investment?12.What is the source of your capital?13.Are you comfortable with the business: Yes No
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
57/60
57
14. If no, what type of problem you are facing / faced Inadequate funds Poor sales Problem in getting the ordered goods No support from the Family
15. Are you engaging your family members in your business?
Yes No
16. If yes who is supporting for your business Son Husband Daughter Father Daughter-in-Law
17.From where you sell your products? separate shop In house
18.Is there any duplicate product for your products in the market? Yes No19.Whether all the communities from the village purchase from the shop?
Yes No
20.Are you dealing only shakti products or additional products? Yes No If yes what type of procuct ________________________
21.Do you face any resistance from the local shop? Yes No22.As an average how much sales per day you are able to achieve from your Shakti product
business? High Moderate Poor other _________________
23.Do you getting profit from your business? Yes No24.From where you are procuring your product?
Directly from the HUL dealer Directly from the company others
(specify)___________________
25.What is the frequency of your orders?Weekly Fortnightly Mothly Based on requirement of the product
26.How long you have to wait for the product supply? within a day 2- 4 days one week More than one week
27.What type of other support you are getting from the company? ________________________28.What are the other supports you are expecting from the company?
________________________________________________
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
58/60
58
Questionnaire for Rural customers
1. General profile:Name of the family head:
Age:Education:Occupation:Number of members in the family:Number of dependents:Family monthly income:
2. Who makes decision in buying FMCG Family Head wife son daughter
3. Mention whether the above decision maker makes in all occasions
Always Often Sometimes
4. State your place of purchase and frequency of FMCGVillage shop Yes No Daily/weekly/Monthly/occasionallyMobile vendor Yes No Daily/weekly/Monthly/occasionallySHG Member Yes No Daily/weekly/Monthly/occasionallyNearby village Yes No Daily/weekly/Monthly/occasionallyNearby Town Yes No Daily/weekly/Monthly/occasionallyWeekly Market Yes No
5. Give the reason for buying from the following places Village shop Availability/less price/convenience/variety Mobile vendor Availability/less price/convenience/variety SHG Member Availability/less price/convenience/variety Nearby village Availability/less price/convenience/variety Nearby Town Availability/less price/convenience/variety
6. If you are buying from nearby village or town where you buy most of the time.Market place Supermarket Departmental store Wholesale outlet Retail outlet
7. Where you sell your farm produce? Govt. Procurement centre local buyers Corporate buyers
8. Do you think they provide reasonable price for your farm produce. Yes No
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
59/60
59
REFERENCES:
1. Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, Mumbai.2. Census of India (2001), Census of India Report 2001,Reterived from
http://censusindia.gov.in/3. CGAP, Washington http://www.cgap.org/p/site/c/template.rc/1.9.2640/.4. Desai, 2000. A study of SHGs and linkage programme. Indian Journal of Agricultural
Economics, 55(1):75-78.
5. Financial-Inclusion/19908110597/0/.6. Frost and Sullivan (2008) Technology a drawback for Financial Inclusion.7. Ganesamurthy, V.S and radha Krishnan (2004) A study on thrift and credit utilization
pattern of SHG in Lakshmi Vilas Bank , Suriya Mpalayam Branch, Erode, , Indian
journal of Marketing, Vol-XXXIV, No-3, January 2004, P.p- 12-16
8. Gopisetti, Rambabu and H, Venkateshwarlu (2008)Product management Of SHG inAndhra Pradesh- A study, Indian journal of Marketing, Vol-XXXVIII, No-3, march
2008, P.p- 30-41
9. http://www.ciol.com/Enterprise/BFSI/News-Reports/Technology-a-drawback-for-10.Impact of Microfinance- An empirical study on the attitude of SHG leaders in Vellore
District.Global Journal of Finance and management. (2010) Volume 2 p.59.
11.Ivatury, G. and Mas, I. (2008) The Early Experience with Branchless Banking,12.Kashyap,Pradeep & Raut, Siddhartha(2009), The Rural Marketing book, Biztantra,
NewDelhi, India
13.Kochhar, S. (2009) Speeding Financial Inclusion. Skoch Development Foundation,14.Kurukshetra. 51(10): 25-30.15.Lee,Kiefer & Carter,Steve(2009), Global Marketing Management ,Oxford university
press, New Delhi,India
16.Manimekalai N. and G. Rajeswari (2002) Gross Roots Entrepreneurship through selfhelp group SEDMI Journal Vol.29.
17.Mckinsey Global Institute (MGI), The 'bird of gold': The rise of India's consumer marketreport 2007
18.Nagayya, D., 2000. Microcredit for Self Help Groups. Kurukshetra, 48(11): 10-15.
-
7/27/2019 study on SHG in rural market
60/60
60
19.National council of Applied economic Research, Delhi (NCAER),(2002) The Indiamarket Demographic Report 2002.Retrived from http://ncaer.org/New Delhi.of India,
New Delhi. ttp://www.nabard.org/pdf/report_financial/Full%20Report.pdf.
20.Prahala, C.K., (2005). The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid: Eradicating Povertythrough Profits, Pearson Education.
21.Puhazhendhi, V.,2000. Evalution study of self. help groups in Tamilnadu. National22.Rangarajan, C. (2008) Report of the Committee on Financial Inclusion. Government23.Sabyasachi Das, 2003. Self Help Groups and microcredit Synergic intergration,24.Shetty, S.L., 2002. Working and Impact of Rural Self-Help Groups and Other Forms of
Micro Financing. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 57(1):31-32.
25.Shyam Shiradhonkar(2009), Rural retail market report for Aadhar.26.Solanki, S.S., 2002. Technologies for rural development. Kurukshetra, 50(4):31.27.The Economic Times, Chennai edition, February 11, 2007.28.Tripathy K.K., 2004. Self-Help Groups-A catalyst of Rural Development, Kurukshetra .
52(8): 40-43
29.Velayudhan, S.K. (2007). Rural marketing: Targeting the Non-Urban Consumer (2 nded.). New Delhi: Response Books.
30.VOICE Report (2008), A Report on the Success and Failure of SHGs in India Impediments and Paradigm of Success.