DATA ANALYSIS

TABLE 4.1.1 SHOWING THE GENDER OF THE REPONDENTS.

GENDER NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS
MALE 49 49 %
FEMALE 51 51 %
TOTAL 100 100%

GENDER

8
20,000 - 40,000
40,000 – 60,000
17

Chart 4.2.1

ANALYSIS
Out of the 100 respondents, 49 were male and 51 were female.
INTERPRETATION:

This clearly shows that out of the total respondents, the majority to whom we approached were
female. Based on the objective of the project- Customer satisfaction, we chose to approach more
female than male respondents.

TABLE 4.1.2 SHOWING THE QUALIFICATION OF THE RESPONDENTS.

EDUCATION NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE OF

RESPONDANTS
SCHOOL 19 19%
UG 35 35%
PG 22 22%
PROFESSION 24 24%
TOTAL 100 100%

QUALIFICATION
40
35
35
30
24
25 22
19
20
15
10
5
0
SCHOOL UG Series1 PG PROFFESSION

Fig 4.3.1

ANALYSIS
 Out of 100 respondents, 19 are studying in school, 35 are UG students, 22 are PG
students and the rest are pursuing a professional course.

INTERPRETATION
Since the customer satisfaction needs are more prominent in the College going students, people
from UG & PG course were approached by us. Also, many income earning group were also
approached.

TABLE 4.1.3 SHOWING SALARY OF THE RESPONDENTS

SALARY NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE OF

RESPONDENTS
BELOW 20,000 46 46 %
20,000 - 40,000 17 17%
40,000 – 60,000 8 8%
60,000 – 80,000 15 15%
80,000-1,00,000 10 10%
ABOVE 1,00,000 4 4%
TOTAL 100 100%
 Salary

4%
10%

15% 46%

8%

17%

Chart 4.2.2

ANALYSIS

Out of 100 respondents, 46 have salaries below 20,000, 17 have salaries between 20,000-
40,000, 8 have salaries between 40,000-60,000, 15 have salaries between 60,000-80,000, 10
have salaries between 80,000-1,00,000 and 4 have salaries above 1,00,000.

INTERPRETATION
Out of the income earning group, the people whose salary was below Rs.20,000/- required
attention on the customer satisfaction since them being the most rational group, would be more
preferable.

TABLE 4.1.4 SHOWING AGE OF THE RESPONDENTS

AGE NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE OF

RESPONDANTS
BELOW 20 21 21%
20-40 55 55%
40-60 24 24%
ABOVE 60 0 0
TOTAL 100 100%
 Age

ABOVE 60 0

40-60 24
Axis Title

20-40 55 Series1

BELOW 20 21

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Axis Title

Fig 4.3.2

ANALYSIS

Out of 100 respondents, 21 are below the age 20, 55 are between the age 20-40, 24 are
between the age 40-60 and none are above the age 60.

INTERPRETATION

MEAN = Total respondents / n

100/4
= 25.
Hence, depending on our project outline, the preferable age group was between 20 to 40 years.

TABLE 4.1.5 SHOWING THE MARITAL STATUS OF RESPONDENTS.

MARITAL STATUS NO OF RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE

SINGLE 67 67%
MARRIED 33 33%
TOTAL 100 100%
 Marital status

33%
SINGLE
MARRIED
67%

Chart 4.2.3

ANALYSIS
Out of 100 respondents, 67 are single and 33 are married .

INTERPRETATION
As observed, people who were unmarried were enquired about the customer satisfaction than
people who were married.

TABLE 4.1.6 SHOWING HOW MANY TIMES THE RESPONDENTS HAVE VISITED THE
RESTAURANT-JALPAAN,GREAMS ROAD.

NO OF TIMES NO OF RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE

ONE TIME 26 26%
2-5 TIMES 40 40%
5-10 TIMES 26 26%
MORE THAN 10 TIMES 8 8%
TOTAL 100 100%
 NO. OF VISITS
Series1

MORE THAN 10 TIMES 8

5-10 TIMES 26

2-5 TIMES 40

ONE TIME 26

Fig 4.3.3

ANALYSIS
Out off 100 respondents, 26 have visited the restaurant only once, 40 have visited 2-5
times, 26 have visited 5-10 times and only 8 have visited more than 8 times.

INTERPRETATION
The above chart concludes that, many people have been to Jalpaan more than twice and
the majority people have liked the restaurant.

TABLE 4.1.7 SHOWING FACTORS THAT ATTRACT RESPONDENTS IN A

RESTAURANT

FACTORS NO OF RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE

PRICE 16 16%
QUALITY 31 31%
AMBIENCE 21 21%
SERVICE 22 22%
INNOVATION 10 10%
TOTAL 100 100%
 FACTORS
INNOVATION 10

SERVICE 22

AMBIENCE 21 Series1

QUALITY 31

PRICE 16

0 10 20 30 40

Fig 4.3.4

ANALYSIS

Out of 100 respondents, 16 prefer the price of the food, 31 prefer restaurants for their quality of
food, 21 prefer the ambience of the restaurant, 22 want a proper service in a restaurant, and 10 of them
prefer innovation in a restaurant.

INTERPRETATION

MODE: It is the highest number of frequency.

During the survey, it was observed that many respondents were attracted by the quality of the food in a
restaurant. Innovation was preferred the least by the respondents. The next best factor contributing
towards customer satisfaction was ambience followed by the price.

TABLE 4.1.8 SHOWING THE TIME PREFERENCE TO VISIT A RESTAURANT.

TIME NO OF RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE

BREAKFAST 18 18%
LUNCH 30 30%
DINNER 52 52%
TOTAL 100 100%

TIME PREFERENCE

BREAKFAST,
18

DINNER, 52
LUNCH, 30

Chart 4.2.4

ANALYSIS
Out of 100 respondents, 18 opt for Breakfast, 30 opt for Lunch and 52 opt for Dinner.

INTERPRETATION
Many respondents choose to visit a restaurant for dinner and the least preferred for
breakfast.
TABLE 4.1.9 SHOWING WHOM PEOPLE PREFER TO VISIT JALPAAN WITH.

INDIVIDUALS NO OF RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE

FAMILY 48 48%
FRIENDS 37 37%
COLLEAGUES 15 15%
TOTAL 100 100%

INDIVIDUAL PREFERENCE

15%

FAMILY
48% FRIENDS
COLLEAGUES
37%

Chart 4.2.5

ANALYSIS
Out of 100 respondents, 48 respondents like to go with family, 37 prefer to go with friends and
15 prefer to go with colleagues.

INTERPRETATION
Many respondents prefer to visit the restaurant with their family and friends. Very less
respondents choose to visit with their colleagues.

TABLE 4.1.10 SHOWING REASONS FOR EATING IN A RESTAURANT

REASON NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE OF
RESPONDENTS
SPECIAL OCCASION 26 26%
GOOD FOOD 41 41%
VALUE FOR MONEY 20 20%
NEAR TO YOUR 13 13%
PLACE
TOTAL 100 100%

REASON

NEAR TO YOUR PLACE 13

VALUE FOR MONEY 20

Series1

GOOD FOOD 41

SPECIAL OCCASION 26

0 20 40 60

Fig 4.3.5

ANALYSIS
Out of 100 respondents, 13 visit restaurants because of the nearness to their place, 20 for
the value of money, 41 for good food and 26 for special occasion.

INTERPRETATION

Since quality of food mattered the most for majority of the respondents, it can be
concluded that people prefer to visit the restaurant for the good food they serve rather
than the venue of the restaurant.
TABLE 4.1.11 SHOWING HOW CUSTOMERS LIKE THEIR FOOD TO BE SERVED

PREFERANCE NO. OF PERCENTAGE OF

RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
SIMPLE 28 28%
FLAVORED 32 32%
CRAFTED 40 40%
TOTAL 100 100%

PREFERENCE

28
40
SIMPLE
FLAVORED

32 CRAFTED

Chart 4.2.6

ANALYSIS
Out of 100 respondents, 28 like their food simple, 32 like their food to be flavored and
40 of them want their food to be crafted.

INTERPRETATION
From the above chart it can be understood that most people like their food crafted
whereas very less prefer simple.
TABLE 4.1.12 SHOWING WHETHER THEIR PARTY HALL IS SPACIOUS

SPACIOUS NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE OF

RESPONDENTS
YES 62 62%
NO 38 38%
TOTAL 100 100%

SPACE

38

YES
62
NO

Chart 4.2.7

ANALYSIS
Out of 100 respondents, 62 think that jalpaans party hall is spacious, and 38 think that it is not
spacious enough.

INTERPRETATION
Since majority of the people have visited the restaurant more than twice, are of the opinion that
the party hall of Jalpaan is spacious.
TABLE 4.1.13 SHOWING IF PEOPLE WOULD RECOMMEND JALPAAN TO OTHERS?

RECOMENDATION NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE OF

RESPONDENTS
YES 51 51%
NO 9 9%
MAYBE 40 40%
TOTAL 100 100

RECOMMENDATION

60

50

40

30 NO. OF RESPONDENTS
51
20 40

10
9
0
YES NO MAYBE

Fig 4.3.6

ANALYSIS
Out of 100 respondents, 51would recommend Jalpaan to others, 9 wouldn’t recommend
Jalpaan to others and 40 may or may not recommend Jalpaan.

INTERPRETATION
The above table shows that majority of respondents would recommend Jalpaan to others
whereas very few respondents were not satisfied with the restaurant.
TABLE 4.1.14 SHOWING IF RESPONDENTS WOULD LIKE TO VISIT THIS
RESATUARANT AGAIN?

VISIT AGAIN NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE OF

RESPONDENTS
YES 36 36%
NO 14 14%
MAYBE 50 50%
TOTAL 100 100%

VISIT
60

50 50

40
36
30
Series1
20
14
10

0
YES NO MAYBE

Fig 4.3.7

ANALYSIS

Out of 100 respondents, 36 would like to visit the restaurant again, 14 will not want to and 50
may or may not visit the restaurant, Jalpaan again.

INTERPRETATION

WEIGHTED AVERAGE= ∑WX/∑W. Let X be the number of respondents, W be the

percentages of the respondents. The weighted average is 39.92.

The chances of the respondents visiting the restaurant again 39.92.

TABLE 4.1.15 SHOWING THE RATINGS OF JALPAAN ON VARIOUS FACTORS.

BASIS HIGHLY SATISFI NEUTR DISSATISFI HIGHLY TOTA

SATISFI ED AL ED DISSATISFI L
ED ED
CHOICE OF 15 55 25 5 0 100
MENU
ACCESSABLE 15 50 25 10 0 100
QUALITY OF 18 48 25 9 0 100
FOOD
PRESENTATIO 26 36 29 9 0 100
N OF FOOD
STAFF 10 52 31 7 0 100
SERVICE
FRIENDLY 6 51 33 9 1 100
STAFF
HOURS OF 7 45 42 5 1 100
OPERATION
TIME 6 38 46 10 0 100
MANAGEMEN
T

ADVERTISEM 9 26 47 18 0 100
ENT
HOME 9 31 39 20 1 100
DELIVERY
HYGIENE 12 53 25 9 1 100
RESTROOM 8 28 52 11 1 100
LAYOUT 14 47 32 7 0 100
AMBIENCE 26 40 25 8 1 100
COMFORT 14 60 18 7 1 100
PRICE 10 39 43 7 1 100
ORDER TIME 11 52 30 7 0 100
CONVENIENT 9 62 24 5 0 100
TO APPROACH

INTERPRETATION
 CORRELATION
A.

1. VARIABLE 1: AGE OF RESPONDENTS

2. VARIABLE 2: THE WAY THE FOOD IS TO BE SERVED

ANSWER: - O.0938
Thus, it implies that there is no relation between the 2 variables.

B.

1. VARIABLE 1: AGE OF RESPONDENTS

2. VARIABLE 2: WITH WHOM RESPONDENTS WILL LIKE TO VISIT A RESTAURANT

ANSWER: 0.198

Thus, it implies that there is less relation between the above two variables.