2011 5th Jan

STUDY OF REASONS FOR LOW SALES OF

GODREJ HOME SECURITY SOLUTION W.R.T
INDIAN MINDSET

2011 5th Jan

CONTENTS PAGE NUMBER

1. INTRODUCTION---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2
2. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2
3. HYPOTHESIS-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2
4. METHODOLOGY---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3
5. FINDINGS
5.1 UNIVARIATE ANALYSIS------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
5.2 BIVARIATE ANALYSIS--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------10
5.3 MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS
5.3.1 MULTIVARIATE REGRESSION-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------10
5.3.2 FACTOR ANALYSIS-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------11
5.3.3 CLUSTER ANALYSIS------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------18
6. CONCLUSION-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------24
7. APPENDICES------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------25
7.1 QUESTIONNAIRE-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------25
7.2 COMMUNALITIES MATRIX FOR FACTOR ANALYSIS-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------28
7.3 SCREE PLOT FOR FACTOR ANALYSIS-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------29
7.4 DENDOGRAM------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------30
7.5 COMMUNALITIES MATRIX FOR CLUSTER ANALYSIS-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------32
7.6 TOTAL VARIANCE EXPERIENCED ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------33
7.7 SCREE PLOT FOR CLUSTER ANALYSIS-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------34

2|Page
 1. INTRODUCTION

Godrej is a leading brand in security systems market. It manufactures products like safes lockers, banking automation products etc. Off late it has added a
new product to its list of security systems market. This is the electronic security solution which can be used in homes, banks, warehouses, retail stores etc.
The Home Security Systems market in India is about Rs 100-125 Crores. This includes home safes, video door, phones and alarm systems. Godrej is eyeing a
70 percent market share in Indian Banks and 20 percent market share in retail stores. After the campaigns of Godrej like the Project Suraksha and the
Break-In Challenge, in which free trials of the solution were provided to the people and the people were challenged to break into a home where Godrej
Security solution was provided, the Home Security Systems market is expected to grow by another 30-35 per cent. Even if Godrej is the market leader in this
domain, the market itself is not very large. So, it is now eyeing European markets as most of the operators in these markets have a monopolistic control. So
a new player will be welcomed.

2. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES

The objective of the study is to assess the awareness and the understanding of the people of Bhubaneswar with respect to GODREJ Home Security Solution
and determining the reasons for the low sales of Electronic Godrej Lock in Bhubaneswar by factor inputs about Electronic Locks from the view point of
people.

This will let us in finding out whether there is a relationship between price, technology used, brand image, service quality, convenience of use etc. of the
Godrej e-lock and its sales in the market.

3. HYPOTHESIS- The following is the null hypothesis of our study-

Sales of a product depends only on the awareness about the product .

If β1= Sales of a product β2= mean price of a product β3 =mean advertising expenditure etc.
Then,
β1= β2= β3......

I.e. sales, price, advertising expenditure etc. of product is independent of each other.

3|Page
 4. METHODOLOGY

We collected Secondary data from various news and websites. From this we could learn that there are some lacunae which need to be filled before we
could reach a conclusion. We needed to find what drives people to buy an electronic security solution when a number of other security solution are
available in the market. We analyzed that people may be price sensitive or technology driven or convenience driven etc. Moreover if a person has never
faced a threat of robbery he will never be able to feel the significance of an electronic security solution and its power over the conventional security
solution. The various elements the behavior of the people and the sale of Electronic Godrej Locks in Bhubaneswar could be changing lifestyle, increase in
disposable income, price, service, convenience and technology.

To bridge this lacuna of knowledge, we made a stratified sample survey of more than 70 respondents where we circulated a questionnaire. (Appendix-1) .
This questionnaire was circulated among college Students, young professionals, families, retired persons etc. The questionnaire was distributed in malls,
households and was floated online. After getting the relevant data, we formed a Master Table from it, and used it as data in various analyzing tools. These
include Univariate (pie-charts and bar graphs), Bivariate (bivariate regression) and Multivariate (multivariate regression-additive and multiplicative
regression, factor analysis and cluster analysis).

We performed the univariate analysis of the features of our respondents to get an idea of what features the majority of them possess. We did bivariate
analysis as we wanted to find the correlation or covariance between different variables. . Multivariate tools find a number of different relationships
amongst different variables. So, we used multivariate statistical tools.

4|Page
 5. FINDINGS

5.1 UNIVARIATE ANALYSIS

We perform the univariate analysis of the features of our respondents to get an idea of what features the majority of them possess. We have 71
respondents and the features that we test are age, education, gender, annual income, percentage of Godrej brand users, percentage of people who based
their purchases mostly on different parameters like price, convenience, service and technology.

84%
80%
60%
40%
20% 9% sample
1% 4% 2%
0%

Fig.1 Percentage distribution of respondents into different age groups

The above Chart shows the percentage distribution of respondents with respect to different age groups. We have considered age groups- 10 to 20, 20 to 30,
30 to 45, 45 to 60, and above 60. From the chart it can be clearly seen that the highest percentage of respondents i.e. 84% lie within 30 to 40 years of age.
This is the young generation which is the reflection of the population in India where the percentage of the younger people is higher than the older ones.
Among our respondents the least percentage was from 10 to 20 years of age and above 60 years of age.

5|Page
 80% 71%
70%
60%
50%
40% 29% sample
30%
20%
10%
0%
male female
Fig. 2 Percentage distribution of respondents according to their gender

The above chart shows that 71% of the total respondents were males and 29% of the total respondents were females. This is a good blend as males are
price and technology conscious and females are more concerned about safety, service and convenience of use. So, we can have a unskewed and unbiased
response to our questionnaire.

6|Page
 60% 58%

40% 37%
20% 5%
0% sample
ate te ol
u u a
cho
rad rad s
g
tg i gh
o s h
p

Fig. 3 Percentage distribution of respondents according to their educational qualifications

The above chart shows the percentage distribution of respondents according to their qualifications. The various educational qualifications that the
respondents possess are high school, graduation and post-graduation. We can see that most of the respondents are graduates. Next highest number of
respondents is the number of post-graduates. Rest are either in high school or lower than that.

7|Page
 60%
50%
40%
30% 54%
20% % of the
26% sample
10%
11%
9%
0%
< 5 5 - 10 10 - 15 >15
lakh lakh lakh lakh

Fig. 4 Percentage distribution of eligible respondents into different income levels

The above chart shows the percentage distribution of the respondents who are earning into different income levels. From the above chart, it is clearly
visible that most of the earning respondents have an annual income of less than 5 lakhs. This is conducive with the distribution of age groups where the
highest percentage of respondents was within age group 20 to 30 years, i.e. in their early phase of their careers. These respondents are more likely to be
price sensitive and as they are young they are influenced by service and technology also. 26% percentage of the earning respondents had an annual income
level of 5 to 10 lakhs. Only 9% of the respondents had greater than 15 lakhs as their annual income and these are the people who are least likely to be price
sensitive. They ought to be more service quality and convenience driven.

8|Page
 Godrej Brand
30%
users
non-users
70%

Fig. 5 Percentage of users and non-users of Godrej brand

The above pie-chart shows the percentage of the users and the non-users of Godrej Security Systems and other products of Godrej brand. From the chart it
is evident that there is a most of the respondents are aware of the Godrej brand and 70% of the respondents are users of Godrej brand products. Only the
minority use any other product. From this we have to find the causes that restrict people from using Godrej Electronic Security Solutions.

9|Page
 Essential Criteria

17% Price
49% 15% Convenience
Service
Technology
19%

Fig. 6 Percentage distribution of respondents having price, convenience, service and technology as preference criteria

The above chart shows that most of the respondents place technology as their first preference while selecting a brand. This is very natural as most of the
respondents are very young and hence tech savvy. 49% of the respondents lay importance to technology as their first criteria for selection, 19% lay
importance to service quality which includes service provided by Godrej as well as the reliability and durability of the product, 17% lay importance to price
and the minority 15% lay importance to convenience. This is evident from the fact that 2% of our respondent are above 60 years of age who would prefer
convenience and ease use.

10 | P a g e
 5.2 BIVARIATE ANALYSIS

Bivariate analysis is done when we want to find the correlation or covariance between different variables. In our research we are more concerned about
what are the factors that influence the buying behaviour of customers of the Electronic Security Solutions. As Electronic Security Solutions are expensive,
highly durable and limited applications in homes and warehouses, so we are not concerned about how many times a person buys an electronic security
solution. Our primary concern is about luring the customers to buy the solution once and for all. So, importance is laid on how the number of customers can
be increased. Moreover, we do not have this insider data about the exact sales of the Electronic Security Solution (though we can find the total sales of
different Godrej products from its Annual Balance Sheet) which could be used as independent variable, so we are not able to perform the bivariate
regression analysis.From our data we can learn only whether our respondents are users of Godrej brand or not. This is a non-metric data which can’t be put
into use for bivariate regression analysis as regression analysis includes a set of dependent and independent variables and the data obtained for both
should be in metric scale.

5.3 MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS

All statistical techniques which simultaneously analyze more than two variables can be named as multivariate techniques. Multivariate tools find a number
of different relationships amongst different variables. Some of the tools that we use here are multivariate regression analysis, factor analysis and cluster
analysis.

5.3.1 MULTIVARIATE REGRESSION

For multivariate regression, we need some dependent and some independent data. In the context of our research, dependent data could be price,
technology, service and convenience of use. Independent data could be sales of Godrej electronic security solution within a particular geographical area. As
we do not have this insider data about the exact sales of the Electronic Security Solution (though we can find the total sales of different Godrej products
from its Annual Balance Sheet), so are not able to perform the multivariate regression analysis. However we can use the tools like factor analysis and cluster
analysis for finding the approximate criteria of selection of Godrej Electronic Security Solution.

11 | P a g e
 5.3.2 FACTOR ANALYSIS

Factor analysis is done to check if the variability within variables is similar enough so that the variables can be grouped together into lesser number of
factors that explain a particular characteristic of the object under question. Factor analysis estimates how much of the variability is due to common factors
or communality. We use the Principal component method of factor analysis.

From the Master table, the following manifest variables were collected-

1. Brand of the security solutions currently used

2. Number of robberies faced
3. Value of goods stolen
4. Brand of the electronic solution preferred
5. Place of use
6. Price of the product
7. Technology implemented
8. Convenience of use
9. Service Provided
10. Celebrity Effect
11. Trial Effect

The factor analysis gives the communality matrix, the component matrix/rotated component matrix , the total variance obtained, Scree plot, KMO-Bartlett
test result, Covariance matrix etc. of which we select the communality matrix, the component matrix/rotated component matrix, the total variance
obtained, Scree plot for our analysis.

12 | P a g e
 Communalities
Initial Extraction
Brandname 1.000 .780
numofrob 1.000 .463
valofgoods 1.000 .723
placeofuse 1.000 .722
brandnamesol 1.000 .820
price 1.000 .782
convenience 1.000 .637
service 1.000 .745
Technology 1.000 .725
celebrityeffect 1.000 .769
trialeffect 1.000 .626

Communality matrix explains the variability of the variables explained by the different factors. We note that all the variables have significant variability.
This communality matrix is the output of unrotated data and when eigen value is equal to 1.

13 | P a g e
 From the total variance matrix, we find that only the first three components have eigen value greater than 1, and these explain 70.836% of the total
variance. This is the total variance explained for an unrotated matrix.

Total Variance Explained when eigen value = 1

Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 4.900 44.544 44.544 4.900 44.544 44.544 3.629 32.992 32.992
2 1.738 15.799 60.344 1.738 15.799 60.344 2.198 19.986 52.978
3 1.154 10.492 70.836 1.154 10.492 70.836 1.964 17.858 70.836
4 .885 8.047 78.883
5 .579 5.266 84.149
6 .471 4.277 88.426
7 .381 3.466 91.892
8 .307 2.792 94.684
9 .251 2.284 96.968
10 .212 1.926 98.894
11 .122 1.106 100.000

14 | P a g e
From the unrotated component matrix we see that most of the factor loadings are under factor-1 and none are there under factor-3. So, we find the
rotated component matrix with eigen value equal to 1 which is the default eigen value. We use varimax rotation for this purpose.

Unrotated Component Matrix

Component
1 2 3
Brandname -.160 .811 .310
numofrob .460 .374 -.333
valofgoods .847 .047 -.056
placeofuse .829 -.019 .187
brandnamesol .688 .129 .575
price .882 .072 .009
convenience .722 .077 -.332
service .341 .597 -.521
Technology -.445 .711 .145
celebrityeffect .790 .001 .382
trialeffect .741 -.217 -.172
Extraction Method: Principal Component
Analysis.
a. 3 components extracted.
Rotated Component Matrixa
Component
1 2 3

15 | P a g e
Brandname .080 .102 .874
numofrob .194 .650 .050
valofgoods .658 .479 -.248
placeofuse .782 .263 -.205
brandnamesol .898 -.010 .117
price .724 .462 -.212
convenience .397 .630 -.289
service -.004 .837 .210
Technology -.252 .032 .813
celebrityeffect .864 .114 -.100
trialeffect .494 .379 -.488
Extraction Method: Principal Component
Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser
Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 5 iterations.

We see that the variables are spread across different components. But again we have a number of cross-loadings due to which we cannot differentiate the
factor loading of one variable under one factor with that of the same variable under a different factor. So we increase the number of factors by decreasing
the eigen value. We obtain the final rotated component matrix when eigen value is 0.5. The communalities matrix can be seen in Appendix-2. We find that
the number of factors explaining the variability of different variables have increased to five. These five factors explain 84.149% of the total variance and
have eigen value greater than or equal to 0.5.

16 | P a g e
 Total Variance Explained when eigen value = 0.5

Compo Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
nent Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 4.900 44.544 44.544 4.900 44.544 44.544 3.230 29.364 29.364
2 1.738 15.799 60.344 1.738 15.799 60.344 1.727 15.697 45.061
3 1.154 10.492 70.836 1.154 10.492 70.836 1.654 15.039 60.100
4 .885 8.047 78.883 .885 8.047 78.883 1.353 12.304 72.404
5 .579 5.266 84.149 .579 5.266 84.149 1.292 11.745 84.149
6 .471 4.277 88.426
7 .381 3.466 91.892
8 .307 2.792 94.684
9 .251 2.284 96.968
10 .212 1.926 98.894
11 .122 1.106 100.000
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotated Component Matrix when eigen value = 0.5

Component
1 2 3 4 5
Brandname .016 .918 -.038 .017 .150
numofrob .137 .080 .156 .129 .931

17 | P a g e
valofgoods .670 -.243 .280 .134 .457
placeofuse .782 -.189 .166 .182 .215
brandnamesol .920 .112 .020 .083 -.074
price .730 -.175 .435 .216 .160
convenience .395 -.213 .742 .272 -.016
service .031 .240 .836 .001 .237
Technology -.176 .752 .141 -.362 -.156
celebrityeffect .713 .047 -.018 .585 .107
trialeffect .276 -.259 .250 .827 .158
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 6 iterations.

From the final component matrix, we can group variables under a single factor to find the latent variables. These variables forming a single group should gel
with each other in terms of similar characteristics. Besides from the scree plot we can see that 3 to 5 factors mostly influence the total variance after which
the slope becomes gradient. (Appendix-3)

The following are the latent variables and their corresponding factor loadings-
1. FACTOR1: PRICE
 Value of goods stolen (0.670)
 Place of use (0.782)
 Brand of the electronic solution preferred (0.920)
 Price of the product (0.730)
 Celebrity Effect (0.713)

18 | P a g e
 2. FACTOR2: BRAND VALUE
 Brand of the security solution currently used (0.918)
 Technology implemented (0.752)
3. FACTOR3: CONVENIENCE OF USE
 Convenience of use (0.742)
 Service Provided (0.836)
4. FACTOR4: PRIOR EXPERIENCE OF THE PRODUCT
 Trial Effect (0.827)
5. FACTOR5: NUMBER OF BAD EXPERIENCES
 Number of robberies faced (0.931)

5.3.3.CLUSTER ANALYSIS

Cluster analysis is done to find clusters having homogeneous characteristics within it. We do a cluster analysis to find the nature of respondents and within
what clusters do their demographic characteristics fall. We can also analyse within what cluster most of them fall and whether it satisfies what we found
doing univariate analysis.
To find clusters within our respondents, we construct a dendogram using SPSS Software. (Appendix-4)

Analysis:

19 | P a g e
At an Euclidean distance of 10 we find 3 clusters having the following characteristics (though there were some deviations)-
1. Cluster 1: 45 Respondents
a. Age: 20-30 years
b. Education: Graduation
c. Annual Salary: less than or equal to 10 lakhs
2. Cluster 2: 23 Respondents
a. Age: 30-45 years
b. Education: Graduation
c. Annual Salary: greater than 10 lakhs and less than 15 lakhs
3. Cluster 3: 3 Respondents(Outliers)
a. Age: greater than 45
b. Education: Post-graduation
c. Annual Salary: greater than 15 lakhs

When we find the factor analysis of the clusters, it gives the same result as of the whole group i.e. price, brand value, convenience of use, prior experience
of the product and the number of bad experiences a person has faced determines his buying behaviour. This can be seen from the factor analysis of the
cluster 1.

Communalities
Initial Extraction
Brandname 1.000 .798
numofrob 1.000 .521
valofgoods 1.000 .782

20 | P a g e
placeofuse 1.000 .695
brandnamesol 1.000 .788
price 1.000 .716
convenience 1.000 .660
service 1.000 .790
Technology 1.000 .760
celebrityeffect 1.000 .766
trialeffect 1.000 .573
Extraction Method: Principal
Component Analysis.

From the communalities extraction matrix, it can be seen that all the variables considered are equally important since their extractions don’t vary much
from each other.

Total Variance Explained

Compo Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings

nent Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 4.874 44.311 44.311 4.874 44.311 44.311
2 1.609 14.631 58.942 1.609 14.631 58.942
3 1.364 12.405 71.347 1.364 12.405 71.347
4 .908 8.252 79.599

21 | P a g e
5 .656 5.964 85.562
6 .490 4.450 90.013
7 .421 3.827 93.839
8 .261 2.372 96.212
9 .216 1.959 98.171
10 .126 1.142 99.312
11 .076 .688 100.000
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
As eigen value considered is equal to 1, so we have mainly three variables with eigen value greater than 1 which explain 71.347% of the total variance
within the group.

Component Matrix
Component
1 2 3
Brandname -.234 .569 .648
numofrob .480 .447 -.303
valofgoods .858 .196 -.080
placeofuse .812 -.022 .190

22 | P a g e
brandnamesol .688 -.097 .553
price .825 .087 .166
convenience .712 .122 -.372
service .250 .814 -.255
Technology -.624 .569 .216
celebrityeffect .752 -.148 .422
trialeffect .718 -.083 -.223
Extraction Method: Principal Component
Analysis.
a. 3 components extracted.
From the component matrix we find that most of the components come under factor 1, so we use a different rotation. We find the rotated component
matrix using varimax rotation.

Rotated Component Matrixa

Component
1 2 3
Brandname .123 .010 .885
numofrob .152 .700 -.090
valofgoods .616 .582 -.252
placeofuse .764 .269 -.199

23 | P a g e
brandnamesol .887 -.017 .037
price .747 .368 -.149
convenience .336 .597 -.435
service -.049 .846 .267
Technology -.442 .035 .750
celebrityeffect .868 .037 -.107
trialeffect .454 .376 -.474
Extraction Method: Principal Component
Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser
Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 5 iterations.
From the rotated component matrix, we find that there are a number of cross loadings. So, we decrease the eigen value to 0.5. The communality matrix
shows an improvement in extractions (Appendix-5) and there are five variables having eigen value greater than 0.5 and these five variables describe
85.562% of the total variance within the data.( Appendix-6) which is also evident from the scree plot(Apendix-7).We get the following rotated component
matrix.

Rotated Component Matrix WHEN EIGEN VALUE = 0.5

Component
1 2 3 4 5
Brandname .043 -.019 .947 -.041 .000
numofrob .087 .204 -.008 .151 .905
valofgoods .618 .359 -.203 .214 .464

24 | P a g e
placeofuse .775 .022 -.182 .095 .417
brandnamesol .916 .068 .044 .099 -.165
price .775 .370 -.121 .197 .068
convenience .366 .693 -.385 .333 .001
service -.004 .821 .245 -.026 .308
Technology -.359 .200 .604 -.483 -.141
celebrityeffect .740 -.196 .080 .460 .223
trialeffect .241 .207 -.143 .906 .163
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 6 iterations.
From the above table we can see that we get the same result for the cluster as we got from the whole sample. And the latent variables are price, brand
value, convenience of use, prior experience of the product and the number of bad experiences a person has faced with the same variables gelling into a
factor respectively.

6. CONCLUSIONS

Based on our analyses we reach to the following conclusions-

We reject our Null Hypothesis and conclude that sales do not depend upon the awareness of the people only. In fact it depends on a number of variable
which we found out as latent variable during the factor analysis. These groups of variables affecting sales are price, prior experience, brand value,
convenience of use, and number of bad experiences that a person has faced. Moreover the awareness of the existence of the brand Godrej is very high and
so is its entry into the electronic market. Still it does not have high sales. From the Bivariate analysis, we can see that the people of India relate the

25 | P a g e
Electronic Locks as a technologically driven factor. From multivariate analysis, we can come to a conclusion that the major variables affecting sales are price,
technology and service.

Since Indian population mainly comprises young people within the age group of 25 to 40 which is the target market for Electronic Godrej Security Solutions,
so to improve sales better technology must be used, prices should be in different ranges for different segments of people, better service should be provided
and lastly more budget should be planned for advertisements, promotions and free trials.

7. APPENDICES

Appendix-1 QUESTIONNAIRE

Name:

1) Age:
a) 10-20
b) 20-30

26 | P a g e
 c) 30-45
d) 45-60
e) 60 above

2) Sex:
a) Male
b) Female

3) Educational Qualification:
a) High School
b) Secondary School
c) Graduate Technical
d) Graduate Non-Technical
e) Post Graduate

4) Salary(Per Annum)
a) Less than 5 Lakhs
b) 5 Lakhs-10 Lakhs
c) 10-Lakhs-15 Lakhs
d) Greater than 15 Lakhs

5) What Security solution do you use for securing your valuables?

a) Safety Doors
b) Grille Gates and lock systems
c) Window Grilles
d) Bank Lockers
e) Pet Dogs
f) Safes
g) Electronic Security Solutions

27 | P a g e
 6) Which brand do you rely on for your Security Solution?
a) Godrej
b) Anchor
c) Mobaj
d) D-Link
e) Others

7) Have you ever been robbed?

a) Yes
b) No

8) If yes, how many times?

a) Once
b) Twice
c) Thrice
d) More than Thrice

9) What was the value of goods stolen?

a) Less than 1 Lakh
b) 1 Lakh – 5 Lakh
c) 5 Lakh – 10 Lakh
d) Greater than 10 Lakh

10) Have you ever used an electronic security solution?

a) Yes
b) No

11) If Yes, where?

28 | P a g e
 a) Home
b) Warehouse
c) Business
d) Others, Please Specify: ________________________________________

12) If yes, was it a Godrej Make?

a) Yes
b) No
If No, Please specify Brand: ___________________________________________
13) Would you prefer to use an electronic safety solution over a traditional lock?
a) Yes
b) No
14) Rate from most important (5) to least important (1) for an electronic security solution:

5 4 3 2 1
Price Communalities
Convenience of Use
Initial Extraction
Service Quality
Technology Brandname 1.000 .868
Celebrity Advertisement numofrob 1.000 .933
Free Trial
valofgoods 1.000 .813
placeofuse 1.000 .755
Appendix-2 brandnamesol 1.000 .871 COMMUNALITIES MATRIX WHEN EIGEN VALUE = 0.5
price 1.000 .825
convenience 1.000 .827
service 1.000 .814
Technology 1.000 .773
celebrityeffect 1.000 .864
29 | P a g e
trialeffect 1.000 .916
Extraction Method: Principal
Component Analysis.
Appendix-3 SCREE PLOT

30 | P a g e
 Appendix-4 DENDOGRAM

31 | P a g e
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * H I E R A R C H I C A L  C L U S T E R   A N A L Y S I S * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 
* *

 Dendrogram using Average Linkage (Between Groups)

                      Rescaled Distance Cluster Combine

   C A S E    0         5        10        15        20        25
  Label  Num  +---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+

          66   ─┬─┐
          71   ─┘ │
          52   ─┐ │
          61   ─┤ ├─┐
           4   ─┤ │ │
          27   ─┤ │ │
          28   ─┤ │ │
          15   ─┼─┘ │
          19   ─┤   │
          12   ─┘   │
          41   ─┐   │
          59   ─┤   │
           1   ─┼───┤
          22   ─┘   │
           2   ─┬─┐ │
          69   ─┘ ├─┤
          42   ───┘ ├───────────┐
          63   ─┐   │           │
          67   ─┤   │           │
           3   ─┤   │           │
          53   ─┤   │           │
          58   ─┤   │           │
          39   ─┤   │           │
          44   ─┤   │           │
          35   ─┤   │           │
          38   ─┤   │           │
          33   ─┤   │           │
          34   ─┤   │           │
          29   ─┤   │           │
          30   ─┤   │           │
          23   ─┤   │           │
          26   ─┤   │           │
          20   ─┤   │           ├───────────────────────────────┐

32 | P a g e
          21   ─┤   │           │                               │
          11   ─┼─┐ │           │                               │
          18   ─┤ ├─┤           │                               │
           8   ─┘ │ │           │                               │
          70   ───┘ │           │                               │
          25   ─┐   │           │                               │
          56   ─┤   │           │                               │
          10   ─┼─┐ │           │                               │
          17   ─┤ ├─┘           │                               │
          24   ─┘ │             │                               │
          32   ───┘             │                               │
          51   ───┬─┐           │                               │
          62   ───┘ ├─────┐     │                               │
          31   ─────┘     │     │                               │
          64   ─┐         │     │                               │
          68   ─┤         │     │                               │
          48   ─┼─┐       ├─────┘                               │
          50   ─┤ │       │                                     │
          60   ─┘ ├─┐     │                                     │
          37   ─┐ │ │     │                                     │
          47   ─┼─┘ │     │                                     │
          16   ─┘   ├─────┘                                     │
          43   ───┬─┤                                           │
          46   ───┘ │                                           │
          55   ─┐   │                                           │
          65   ─┤   │                                           │
          45   ─┼─┐ │                                           │
          49   ─┤ │ │                                           │
          54   ─┘ │ │                                           │
          36   ─┐ ├─┘                                           │
          57   ─┤ │                                             │
           7   ─┤ │                                             │
          13   ─┼─┘                                             │
          14   ─┤                                               │
           9   ─┘                                               │
           6   ─┬─┐                                             │
          40   ─┘ ├─────────────────────────────────────────────┘

           5   ───┘

Appendix-5 COMMUNALITIES MATRIX WHEN EIGEN VALUE = 0.5

33 | P a g e
 COMMUNALITIES MATRIX WHEN
EIGEN VALUE = 0.5
Initial Extraction
Brandname 1.000 .900
numofrob 1.000 .891
valofgoods 1.000 .812
placeofuse 1.000 .817
brandnamesol 1.000 .883
price 1.000 .796
convenience 1.000 .874
service 1.000 .830
Technology 1.000 .787
celebrityeffect 1.000 .853
trialeffect 1.000 .968
Extraction Method: Principal
Component Analysis.

Appendix-6

34 | P a g e
 Total Variance Explained

Compo Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
nent Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 4.874 44.311 44.311 4.874 44.311 44.311 3.300 30.002 30.002
2 1.609 14.631 58.942 1.609 14.631 58.942 1.589 14.445 44.448
3 1.364 12.405 71.347 1.364 12.405 71.347 1.588 14.437 58.885
4 .908 8.252 79.599 .908 8.252 79.599 1.504 13.675 72.560
5 .656 5.964 85.562 .656 5.964 85.562 1.430 13.002 85.562
6 .490 4.450 90.013
7 .421 3.827 93.839
8 .261 2.372 96.212
9 .216 1.959 98.171
10 .126 1.142 99.312
11 .076 .688 100.000
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Appendix-7 SCREE PLOT

35 | P a g e
36 | P a g e