Assignment no-2

Service marketing

TOPIC:- KFC

SUBMITTED TO: - SUBMITTED BY:-

Ms. Jaspreet Kaur. Chandan Kumar

RT1901 “B58”
Introduction
KFC, known as Kentucky Fried Chicken, is a chain of fast food restaurants based in Louisville,
Kentucky. Kfc try to meet consumer’s need by developing a variety of menus
Even if we note that the kfc menu is not the same in every country in the world, it is known
mainly for its fried chicken, its chicken pieces prepared in the exact same way than it was back. 
In some countries KFC menus also offer product from other franchise such as pizza hut.
In the midst of the depression, Harland Sanders who was born just outside Henryville (Indiana),
opens his first restaurant in the small front room of a gas station in Corbin, Kentucky.
In 1936, Kentucky Governor Ruby Laffoon makes Harland Sanders an honorary Kentucky
Colonel in recognition of his contributions to the state's cuisine.
The Sanders Court & Café adds a motel and expands the restaurant to 142 seats.
In 1952,the Colonel began actively franchising his chicken business by traveling from town to
town and cooking batches of chicken for restaurant owners and employees and awarded Pete
Harman of Salt Lake City with the first KFC franchise.

We can define consumer expectation that is the Perceived-value customers seek

from the purchase of a good or service. See also customer needs and customer requirements.
There may be three premices of expectation, first lower expectations often lead to greater
satisfaction, individuals in general, and especially those who are sensitive to the gap between
performance and expectations, have the incentive to and actually do “strategically” lower their
expectations (Kopalle and Lehmann 2001). Second, individuals with a long term orientation are
likely to be less inclined to lower expectations in the hope of temporarily feeling better. Third,
long term orientation and the tendency to lower expectations are at least partially driven by
cultural factors. In India, belief in karma, with its emphasis on a longer term orientation, will
therefore to some extent counter-act the tendency to lower expectations.
The purpose of the study is know the factors which influence the customer expectation from kfc
restaurant.
Review of literature
Monika J.A. Schroder (2005) Most respondents (82 per cent) regularly purchased fast food
from one of the companies; purchases were mostly impulsive (57 per cent) or routine (26 per
cent), suggesting relatively low-level involvement in each case. While there was scepticism
regarding the CSR activity being promoted, expectations about socially responsible behavior by
the companies were nevertheless high. Four factors were isolated, together explaining 52 per
cent of the variance in fast-food purchasing behavior. They were brand value, nutritional value,
ethical value and food quality. David R. Eppright, Nestor M. Arguea and William L. Huth
(2006) Multivariate vector auto regression analyses were undertaken to investigate whether or
not aggregate consumer attitude and expectation measures such as the University of Michigan
Index of Consumer Sentiment and Consumer Expectations and the Conference Board Index of
Consumer Confidence and Consumer Expectations possessed a priori information not contained
in certain economic variables which might be useful in anticipating changes in future aggregate
consumer expenditures. The multivariate vector auto regression analyses indicated that the
aggregate consumer expectation measures led the aggregate consumer expenditure measures
more often than did the economic indicators. Thus, the aggregate consumer expectation measures
appeared to provide predictive power not possessed by the economic indicators in the
analyses .A.V. CARDELLO (2008) three studies were conducted to assess the effects of
disconfirmed consumer expectations on food acceptability. In the first, disconfirmed
expectations for the sensory attributes of an edible film had a negative effect on acceptability of
the film. Greater disconfirmation resulted in lower acceptance and purchase intent. In the second
study, written product information was used to establish three levels of expected acceptability
and expected bitterness for a novel fruit beverage. Comparison of preexposure (expected) and
post exposure (perceived) ratings of acceptability and bitterness supported an assimilation model
of disconfirmation effects for conditions in which expectations of acceptability were high and
expectations of bitterness were low. A contrast effect was observed for bitterness judgments
when expectations of bitterness were high. Associative effects resulting from the expectation
manipulation were observed on other sensory attributes. In the third study, expectations were
manipulated to influence both direction (positive versus negative) and degree of disconfirmation
for the acceptance of cola beverages. Results provided further support for an assimilation model
of these effects.

Objective:-

 To know the factor affecting the consumer expectation towards the service provided by
KFC.

Research methodology

Research design

The purpose of the study to know the consumer expectation towards kfc restaurant in Jalandhar.
The study is descriptive in nature A survey was conducted through which an analysis was
drowned.
Major objective of descriptive research is to describe something usually market characteristics
or functions .and also this research is already done before this research.

Sample size

A sample of “50” consumers of Jalandhar are taken for the purpose of study and
analysis.

Sample element:

Every consumer who consume the fast-food of kfc in Jalandhar.

Sampling technique

Convenience sampling technique (non probability sampling) was used for the survey.
Data collection: data was collected through primary and secondary sources.

Primary data: primary data was collected with the help of structured questionnaire and personal
interview with consumers.

Secondary data: Source of secondary data was collected with help of published, journals and
magazines, the websites.

QUESTIONNAIRE

 Name:- …………………………………………………………..

 City:- …………………………………………………………….

 Age group :-
18 – 21 22 – 35
36 – 45 45 – above
 Gender :-
Male female
 Occupation:-
Student Self Employed
Salaried If any other

Than specify …………………………………………..

 Income own or family (p/month.):-

Less than 15000 15000-20000
25000-30000 30000-above
1. Do you prefer go to the restaurant?

Yes No (If no than go question no:6 )

2. How many time you go to the restaurant?

Once in a week twice in a month

four time in six month If occasionally (plz. specify )………………………..

 3. Do you know about kfc restaurant?

Yes No

4. Do you go to the kfc restaurant?

Yes no

( if no then go to question no: 8)

5. If yes then, from which source you know about kfc restaurant?

Media Friends

Advertisement others

6. Which are the important factor which influence your expectations from kfc (please rate
according to yourself 1 to 5)
1- Definitely agree, 2- Probably agree, 3- Might or might not, 4- Probably not agree, 5-
Definitely not agree.

Sr. Factors 1 2 3 4 5
No
1. When I go to kfc, I wish for testy food.

2. When I go to kfc, I wish for quality food.

3. When I go to kfc, I wish for hygienic food.

4. When I go to kfc, I wish for competitive price.
5. When I go to kfc, I wish for good environment.

6. When I go to kfc, I wish for quality music.

7. When I go to kfc, I wish for low service time.

8. When I go to kfc, I wish for advance billing system.
9. When I go to kfc, I wish for facility of various mode of payment.

10. When I go to kfc, I wish for variety of non-veg.

7. Why you not prefer the restaurant please specify your specific reason.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
8. Why you do not go to kfc restaurant? (Please give your specific reason)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Factor Analysis

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .463

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 110.360

df 45

Sig. .000

Communalities

Initial Extraction

view about test of food 1.000 .775

view about quality of food 1.000 .900

view about hygienic food 1.000 .736

view about price of

1.000 .667
competitor

view about environment 1.000 .796

view about quality of music 1.000 .799

view about service time 1.000 .897

view about billing system 1.000 .775

view about avability of

1.000 .645
various payment mode

view about variety of non-

1.000 .733
veg

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

 Total Variance Explained

Extraction Sums of Squared Rotation Sums of Squared

Initial Eigenvalues Loadings Loadings

Componen % of Cumulative % of Cumulative % of Cumulative

t Total Variance % Total Variance % Total Variance %

1 2.456 24.559 24.559 2.456 24.559 24.559 2.220 22.201 22.201

2 2.244 22.443 47.002 2.244 22.443 47.002 1.986 19.864 42.065

3 1.534 15.340 62.342 1.534 15.340 62.342 1.975 19.754 61.819

4 1.490 14.897 77.239 1.490 14.897 77.239 1.542 15.420 77.239

5 .862 8.617 85.856

6 .427 4.267 90.123

7 .374 3.736 93.859

8 .312 3.120 96.979

9 .183 1.835 98.814

10 .119 1.186 100.000

Extraction Method: Principal Component

Analysis.
 Component Matrixa

Component

1 2 3 4

view about test of food .525 .624 -.323 .081

view about quality of food -.035 .254 -.832 .377

view about hygienic food .618 .546 -.159 -.178

view about price of

.264 .427 .568 .304
competitor

view about environment -.665 .362 .265 .391

view about quality of music -.429 .636 .321 .328

view about service time -.214 -.362 -.325 .784

view about billing system .790 .075 .221 .311

view about avability of

.262 -.727 .154 .155
various payment mode

view about variety of non-

.602 -.332 .197 .470
veg

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

a. 4 components extracted.
 Rotated Component Matrixa

Component

1 2 3 4

view about test of food .857 .049 .124 .151

view about quality of food .397 -.022 -.208 .836

view about hygienic food .832 -.087 .124 -.148

view about price of

.236 .542 .486 -.286
competitor

view about environment -.250 .821 -.200 .141

view about quality of music .076 .883 -.116 -.002

view about service time -.384 .085 .253 .824

view about billing system .389 -.065 .783 -.082

view about avability of

-.461 -.432 .496 .016
various payment mode

view about variety of non-

-.031 -.173 .831 .107
veg

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

a. Rotation converged in 7 iterations.

 Component Transformation Matrix

Compo
nent 1 2 3 4

1 .568 -.447 .673 -.155

2 .740 .625 -.230 -.088

3 -.334 .445 .410 -.722

4 -.132 .460 .570 .668

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

HYPOTHESIS

Null hypothesis Alternative hypothesis

1) H0-all variable have same effect on 2) H1 – all variable have different effect on
consumer expectation regarding service consumer expectation regarding service
provided by KFC provided by KFC

INTERPRETATION
Our null hypothesis is rejected because all factors have different effect on the consumer
expectation regarding service provided by KFC. And our alternative hypothesis is selected and
we conclude that: -
After applying the Factor analysis test we find the four factors which have heavy loading value,
because they contribute 77% and 23% data information are lost. The first factor which name is
nutritious food identifies with variables like (testy food and hygienic food). The second factor
which named is ambience identifies variable like (competitive price, good environment and
quality music). Third factor which name is service quality identifies with variable like (advance
billing system and variety of non-veg food). Fourth factor which name is availability identifies
with variable like (quality food and low service time).

Reference:-
http://www.kfc.co.in/
http://www.kfc.co.in/aboutus.aspx
http://www.kfc.co.in/KFCAllMenu.aspx
http://www.kfc.co.in/WhatsHot.aspx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KFC