This document summarizes a study on store choice behavior of women consumers in Mumbai when purchasing groceries. The study found that: 1) Satisfaction levels of men and women were similar across factors like durability, size, after-sales service, and colors/shades when buying jeans. 2) Around 33% of people purchase jeans every 6 months in addition to other occasions. 3) Jeans are purchased more on average by customers under age 23.

1. AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF STORE CHOICE BEHAVIOUR OF WOMEN
CONSUMER IN THE PURCHASE OF GROCERY
1 | P a g e
Submitted By:-
AJIT VINOD DUBEY
MMS15
Rustomjee Business School
Rustom Irani Marg, Rustomjee Acres
Dahisar (West),
Mumbai- 400068

2. December 2013.
2 | P a g e
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to express our sincere gratitude to all those who helped
in making this project a success.
Special thanks to our Dean, Dr. Hanif Kanjer (Rustomjee Business
School) for his timely guidance and support throughout the research
project.
Our mentors Prof. Shipra Bhatia, Prof. Charmi Shah and other faculty
members have given their valuable time and ideas. We express our
heartfelt thanks to them.
Finally we take this opportunity to thank all the people who participated
in our survey.

3. 3 | P a g e
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Contents
CHAPTER 1 ......................................................................................................................................................... 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................ 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5
MAJOR FINDINGS 5
CONCLUSIONS 5
RECOMMENDATIONS 6
CHAPTER 2 ......................................................................................................................................................... 7
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................. 7
THE PURPOSE / RATIONALE OF RESEARCH 8
INTRODUCTION 8
LITERATURE REVIEW 10
CHAPTER 3 ........................................................................................................................................................14
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................14
OBJECTIVE 15
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 15
DATA SOURCES 16
SAMPLING PLAN 16
CHAPTER 4 ........................................................................................................................................................17
HYPOTHESIS ......................................................................................................................................................17
DATA ANALYSIS 18
PROPOSED HYPOTHESIS 63

4. 4 | P a g e
CHAPTER 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

5. 5 | P a g e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
We decided to have a market research on jeans buying behavior of the consumers of
Mumbai. This study was carried out to determine different factors that affect the purchase
decision for jeans and consumer preferences for different brands. During the event we
decided to get feedback from customers who normally visit various types of outlets for the
purchase, so that appropriate primary data could be collected though questionnaire.
MAJOR FINDINGS
CONCLUSIONS
Taking into account the responses of the respondents and analyzing them using statistical
measures it can be concluded that
a. Satisfaction levels of men and women while buying jeans is more or less the same across
parameters like durability, sizes, after sales service, shades and colors.
b. Around 33% people purchase jeans at least once in six months.
c. Jeans are purchased more on an average by customers below the age of 23. d. Purchase
of jeans based on the brands is independent of the age group.

6. 6 | P a g e
RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Since satisfaction levels across gender is more or less the same over
durability, sizes, after sales services, shades and colors, comfort and price,
jeans manufacturers should focus on these parameters in order to woo
customers and widen their customer base to increase revenues.
b. Since 33% of the customers purchase jeans once in six months in
addition to occasions, jean manufacturers can add some bimonthly and
semiannual discounts and sales in order to boost sales and change
purchasing patterns of customers keeping in mind the parameters
customers look for while buying jeans.
c. Since the average age of customers purchasing jeans is 23 years
which may not actually be a representative of the general population yet it
is indicative of the fact that promotions should be made keeping the youth
factor in mind as jeans project a youth image among people.
d. Since purchase of jeans based on brands is independent of age
group, instead of focusing on differentiating the brand on age groups,
manufacturers should differentiate their brand on the ranges, color, comfort
they provide to their customers.
e. Since both men and women both favor parameters like comfort,
manufacturers should focus on making their products available at better prices
to shift the focus from unbranded jeans to their brands.
f. Since satisfaction levels are low in case of after sales service, manufacturers
should improve on the after
sales service they provide.

7. 7 | P a g e
CHAPTER 2
INTRODUCTION

8. 8 | P a g e
REPORT MAIN BODY
THE PURPOSE / RATIONALE OF RESEARCH
(a) To evaluate the market share o f hyper-markets, small format organised stores and
unorganised (kirana) stores today for food and grocery (F&G) shopping;
(b) To find out the attitudes and preferences of shoppers to different retail formats;
(c) To find out the shopping patterns and spread of the monthly basket across different
formats.
INTRODUCTION
According to ICRIER (2005), food and grocery is the largest retail sector
worldwide.Food and grocery presents the most significant potential in the Indian context
also.In the overall retail sales pie, food and grocery stood at 59.5% share in 2007. It is
the single most dominant category in private consumption in India, valued at 7,920 bn.In
the organized retail segment, Food and Grocery is valued at 90 bn. This organized
market constitutes barely 1.1% of the total food and grocery retail market (Images F&R
Research, 2009). Herein lies a tale of unused retail opportunities in India. Ideally,the
share of food and grocery in organized sector should be close to its share in overall
retail sales. The following points give some more information on the existing situation of
food and grocery category in India.
• The significant share of food-related items in retail sales may account for the large
number of kirana stores in the Indian retail sector (almost 7.5 mn). Over the past few
years, a number of organized players have come up. This segment presents the most
significant potential in the Indian context, as consumer spending is highest on food.
• Apart from the kirana stores, food and grocery is being sold in India through modern
formats like supermarkets, hypermarkets, discount stores and convenience stores.
Table 1, given below, shows the characteristics of food retail formats in India (The
Economic Times Retail, 2003).
• Nielsen’s Shoppers’ Trend Study, 2008 has revealed some changes in consumer
shopping behavior and purchase pattern in the advent of modern trade. Some of the
key insights are as follows (Images F&R Research, 2009):
– Shoppers are shopping at supermarkets more frequently than a year back and the
average basket size per trip is also increasing.

9. – The local grocer /general store, although still supreme, is seeing a steady erosion of
customer base and spends.
– Supermarket shoppers are increasingly shopping at Supermarkets (SM) for fresh
fruits and vegetables with a whopping six times increase in the share of supermarket in
fresh food (among SM shoppers). Correspondingly, the share of local vendor has fallen
by half.
– Wet markets, at present, have managed to retain their customer base.
– The modern format is no longer catering only to the upper socioeconomic groups. The
Socio-Economic Class (SEC) A demographic now comprises less than half of the
customer base with both SEC B and more so, SECC seeing an increase in the
proportion. Given the growing importance of this segment, retailers need to keep in
mind the needs of both their primary and secondary customers while deciding on brand
and SKU stocking.
– The attributes that a customer looks for while selecting a store also are almost
unchanged, with locational convenience still supreme followed by perceived value for
money, range and quality of stocking.
– Indian consumers are rapidly evolving and accepting modern retail formats. By 2011,
India will have an additional 280 hypermarkets, 3,200 supermarkets, 400 department
stores and approximately 1,200 mega specialty stores (the category killers) and 20,000
exclusive
brand outlets.The proliferation of different store formats especially in the urban centres
of our country is not merely an offshoot of our attempt to ape the West. There has been
a conscious shift towards more open, bigger and cleaner formats in the recent past.
However, the typical Indian woman consumer has still not been able to give up the local
Kirana store for her groceries procurement. This study attempts to compare three of the
most popular store formats-the local Kirana store, the local Supermarket and on outlet
of an organized Retail Chain such as D Mart and Big Bazaar-with respect to the drivers
of store format choice.
There is a growing need to evaluate the true drivers of shopping behavior in
the
Indian context. The Indian retailing scenario seems to be driven more by euphoria.
To a large section of customers the new formats are perceived to add insufficient
additional value, except for novelty. The new expansions are adaptations of western
formats fetching moderate to lukewarm success. Several successful chains are
currently
holding back new expansions. Store choice and patronage have been widely studied
across the world. There is still vast scope for research and analysis as the retailing
environment changes rapidly, leading to changed shopper expectations and
realignment
of the choice set of stores. This phenomenon gains greater significance in the Indian
9 | P a g e

10. market, with the introduction of larger and more diverse retail formats by organized
retailers. It is providing new experiences and options to shop for the consumer.
A variety of formats are being rolled out, with mixed success. Both retailers and
shoppers are currently in an evaluation phase with no clear verdict as to what may
drive the choice of stores in the longer term.
. The underlying issue is—can organized retail in food and
grocery compete with the mom-and-pop stores, which offer the unbeatable advantages
of convenience of access and home delivery (The Economic Times Retail, 2003).
The trademark of Indian retailing, the small kirana shop with a high level of
personalized
service, is making shoppers reluctant to depart from traditional ways of shopping.
Tuli and Mookerjee (2004), in their study of shop patronage behavior of Indian rural
consumers, have also given further direction of research by stating that a study on the
lines of their research could also be conducted on urban consumers’ demographic
profiles. This understanding can be applied to corporate retail format decision.
This study was undertaken to understand the various factors in terms of decision
variables which influence the consumers’ preference and in understanding the criticality
of these factors in choosing between the two major competing formats for food and
grocery category, i.e., traditional (kirana) stores and modern (organized) retailers.
Significantly, it is the consumer’s perceptions of the relative merits of the retail
attributes present in both these formats which are of critical importance to the marketer.
The importance of perceptual attributes goes beyond the physical features of stimuli
since consumers link attributes to benefits of purchasing and consuming. These
benefits
or consequences lead to certain end states or values that consumers wish to achieve
(Aaker et al., 1992; Mowen, 1993; and Belch and Belch, 1995).
SOUTH ASIAN
10 | P a g e
LITERATURE REVIEW
Mulky (2005) stated that only a small proportion of India’s population owns self
transportation vehicles. Lack of public transport systems, overcrowding and high
commute times, roads that are often choked with traffic, make it difficult for commuters
to travel long distance. The infrastructure of roads and transport is even less-developed
in rural areas. Hence, a large majority of India’s population is compelled to make most
of their retail purchases, especially of daily necessities from shops located in their
neighbourhood. Traditional retailing has been established in India for some centuries.
It is a low cost structure, mostly owner-operated, has negligible real estate and labor
costs and little or no taxes to pay. Consumer familiarity that runs from generation to

11. generation is one big advantage for the traditional retailing sector. In contrast, players
in the organized sector have big operating expenses to meet, and yet have to keep
prices low enough to be able to compete with the traditional sector. Organized retailing
also has to cope with the middle class psychology that the bigger and brighter sales
outlet is, the more expensive it will be. Organized food retailing is moving towards
modernization and systemization offering quality, standardization, variety of products,
etc., at competitive prices. The cheap prices are a big attraction to the Indian consumer
who is highly price-driven and value conscious.The formats and types of the retail
market are quite varied in India. As per Anand and Nambiar (2003), there is an excellent
food retailing system that has been established by kirana (mom-n-pop) stores that
continue to meet all the retail requirements albeit without the convenience of shopping
as provided by the retail chains. Some of the several co-existing types and formats are
the road side hawkers and the mobile (pushcart variety) retailers: the kirana stores (the
Indian equivalent of the mom-n-pop stores of the US), within which are of two
categories—open format in more organized outlets and small to medium food retail
outlets. SOUTH ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT Volume 18128 No. 1 The
unorganized sector is serviced mostly by the mobile retailers. They can be seen in
every Indian by lane and are therefore, difficult to track, measure and analyze.
Most retailing of fresh foods in India occurs in mandis and roadside hawker
parks, which are usually illegal and entrenched. Semi-organized retailers like kirana
grocers and provision stores are characterized by more systematic buying and selling
from fixed structures. For a long time, the corner grocery store was the only choice
available to the consumer, especially, in urban areas. This is slowly giving way to
international formats of retailing like supermarkets/grocery chains, convenience stores
and fastfood chains. The traditional grocers, by introducing self-service formats as well
as value-added services such as credit and home-delivery, have also tried to redefine
themselves. The Indian customer has always shopped at mandis for fruits, vegetables
and dry grocery and is habituated and comfortable with buying after getting a feel of
the products (Prasuna and Sughanda, 2005). This characteristic of the Indian
consumers has led the organized food retail players to set up separate areas in the
supermarkets catering to fresh produce. Some players also offer value-added services
such as home delivery, sabzi mandi (vegetable market) on phone, etc., thereby,
capturing the ‘Indianness’ in their business.
When comparing the how kirana stores fare with respect to supermarkets,
Guptaet al. (2002) find that retailers who have a strong local touch can better estimate
demand for products and assess profiles of the products that can sell, based on their
familiarity with local tastes, consumer preferences and consumption patterns. Kirana
stores in India seem to fare better than modern retailers on this count. According to
Aggarwal (2000), in India, the kirana shop has the edge over supermarkets for many
reasons. One reason is that Indian housewife is reluctant to go further than the nearest
11 | P a g e

12. kirana for items of daily use. Home delivery is free and accounts are settled at the
customers’ convenience, interest free. In India the kirana shop has an edge over
supermarkets for several reasons: proximity, service and price (Business Today, 1999).
To be successful in India essentially means to draw away shoppers from the roadside
Hawkers and kirana stores to supermarkets (Anand and Nambiar et al., 2003).
To counter the unbeatable advantage of convenience of a hop, skip and jump access
and home delivery, organized retailers seem to have just one option—offer attractive
prices. Krishnan (2001) has also written that small retail outlets have traditionally
served the markets efficiently, making customers accustomed to getting the products
within easy reach. These small retail outlets are made viable by the low cost of
infrastructure and operations in India. Sinha and Banerjee (2004) found that overall
proximity and merchandize were the primary reasons for shoppers choosing their store.
More than 70% of the respondents indicated these as their strongest reason for
choice.Then came the reasons like ambience (8%) and patronized store (8%). The
authors have said that grocery and fruit and vegetable stores were visited by shoppers
based on more proximity and patronization. The importance of relationship/comfort level
with the retailer is stressed with regard to grocery stores. Shoppers perceive stores in a
FOOD AND GROCERY RETAIL: PATRONAGE BEHAVIOR OF INDIAN
URBAN CONSUMERS Volume 18129No. 1
multidimensional way and that the dimensions vary significantly across the types of
stores frequented. Consumers at grocery/fruit and vegetable stores report the most
diverse set of observations regarding these stores. Their basic premise is that the
drivers of store loyalty (an antecedent of store choice) can be categorized into three
broad
groups—utilitarian dimensions also termed as “Risk Reducers (proximity, quality of
merchandize, personal relationship)”, “Choice Enhancers (convenience, availability
and spread, design-format)”, and “Shopping Experience Enhancers (ambience,
customer
service, entertainment)”. Their study does indicate that new formats are being chosen
based on parameters different from the old format, such as merchandise, ambience
and service.
In a KSA Technopak study presented by Business Today (1999), the reasons why
housewives prefer to purchase grocery from the neighborhood supermarket (modern
retail store) are listed as location convenience (easily approachable on foot), stock of
everything from scrubs and mops to fresh fruits (product variety and assortment),
enough parking facility (in case the customer drives down to the store) and convenient
operating hours. Other variables which affect the retail outlet choice are value-formoney,
quality of products, polite and courteous salespeople, exchange/returns policy,
non-interfering salespeople, product choice, product width, and product information.
12 | P a g e

13. Tuli and Mookerjee (2004) studied the patronage behavior of Indian rural
consumers to identify the decision variables influencing the patronage of various retail
formats such as village shops and periodic markets (haats) using Tea as the product.
They concluded that village shops are perceived to be low on shopping activity cost in
comparison to periodic centers, where as periodic markets are perceived to have high
probability of lower prices and high product variety. Rural consumers prefer to meet
their immediate and day-to-day needs from village shops; at the same time bulk
purchases will drive them to the periodic markets.
Given the rapid rate at which new retail formats have been introduced in the
Indian market in recent times, many with limited success, it is imperative for Indian
businesses to understand changing shopping behavior among consumers, especially
with regard to their preferred points of purchase. There is still vast scope for research
and analysis as the retailing environment changes rapidly, leading to changed shopper
expectations and realignment of the choice set of stores. Thus, consumer purchasing
behavior can be termed as patronage behavior of the consumer. From the above given
literature review, the study of the patronage behavior of consumers in food and grocery
category has been identified as a hitherto unexplored area and the research study has
been conducted in this area.
13 | P a g e

14. 14 | P a g e
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

15. OBJECTIVE
To understand the factors which influence the store choice behaviour of
women for household grocery. The two factors included are-
15 | P a g e
● Consumer profile
● Comparison of store layout
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This study began with a review of literature already available as research
papers and articles. The variables identified were as follows:
INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
Age, Marital status, family size, Professional Status, Income and Native
state.
DEPENDANT VARIABLES
Frequency of store visits, average basket size at each format, monthly
grocery spend and preference for different store formats.
Study was conducted in two parts.The two parts are Exploratory and
Descriptive

16. 16 | P a g e
DATA SOURCES
PRIMARY DATA
The primary data was collected from the questionnaire.
The questionnaire was prepared asking 250 respondents about their purchase behavior
towards grocery. The questionnaire was asked to women. The questionnaire is a mixed
bag of open ended and closed ended questions.The questionnaires were filled by the
respondents themselves. The respondent was free to give his opinion on the questions
. An equal number of responses were recorded from women to carry out our research.
SECONDARY DATA
Secondary data was collected from google, newspaper, magazine and
google scholar to do exploratory studies
SAMPLING PLAN
1.SAMPLING UNIT:
Women of all age groups residing in the city of
Mumbai.
2. SAMPLE SIZE:
The sample size taken is 250
3. SAMPLING TECHNIQUE:
The sampling technique carried out is Non probabilistic judgement
sampling.

17. 17 | P a g e
CHAPTER 4
HYPOTHESIS

18. 18 | P a g e
DATA ANALYSIS
Data collected from primary source was analyzed using statistical test such
as:
1. t-test
2. chi-square test
3. p-test
4. Regression
5. ANOVA- one factor
6. ANOVA-two factor

19. H1:- The average age of women who buy grocery from Organised Retail Shop is equal to
30 (Urmila)
19 | P a g e
Average of
Age
3 33
Grand Total 33
N Ha: μ=30
A Ho: μ≠30
T
two tail
test
T t test
A 5%
R
0.05
C 1.96 47.5
O
3.71
P
Row Labels
FORMULA
X'-μ
S/(SQRT(N))
1.96
1.96 3.71
X'-μ 3
N 125
SQRT 11.18 reject the null hypot hesis
SD 9.04
S/(SQRT(N)) 0.81

20. H2:- The average age of women who buy grocery from Supermarket is equal to 30.
(Ajit)
20 | P a g e
Row Labels
Average of
Age
2
31.83
Grand Total
31.83
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
N 100 X 31.83
S 8.867
U 30
N Ho: = 30
A Ha: ≠ 30
TWO TAIL
T
TEST
T T TEST
47.5 47.5
A 5%
R 2.50%
Total
2.5
C tC
2.5
O tO
-
2.06383
2
2
Total

21. 21 | P a g e
P
-1.984
1.984
REJECT NULLHYPOTHESIS
H3:- The average age of women who buy grocery from Kirana stores is equal to
30.(Pooja)

22. 22 | P a g e
Row Labels
Average of
Age
1 33
Grand Total 33
N Ho: μ = 30
A HA: μ ≠ 30
T
Two-Tail
Test
T T-test
A 5%
R 5%
C 47.5
O 3.73
P
40
30
20
10
-
formula
3.73
X'-μ 3.73
47.5
(S/(SQRT
N))
X' 33
μ 30
S 8.99
N 125
H4:- The average spend per visit to an Organised Retail Shop to purchase grocery is equal to Rs
1500. (shahista)
Row Labels Average of Typical Basket Value
1
Total
Total
Linear (Total)
1,800.00
1,600.00
1,400.00
1,200.00
1,000.00
Total

23. 10,000.00
23 | P a g e
3 1,666.67
Grand Total 1666.666667
N Ha: μ=1500
A Ho: μ≠1500
T two tail test
T t test
A 5%
R 0.05
C
O Zo: 0.54
P
FORMULA
X'-μ 0.54
S/(SQRT(N))
X'-μ 167
N 125
SQRT 11.18
SD 3,468.17
S/(SQRT(N)) 310.20
H5:- The average spend per visit to a Supermarket to purchase grocery is equal to Rs
9000.(Kanchan)
8,000.00
6,000.00
4,000.00
2,000.00
Total
Total

24. 24 | P a g e
Row Labels
Ave
rage
of
Tot
al
Mo
nthl
y
Spe
nd
2
9,23
8.10
Grand Total
9,23
8.10
N Ho: μ=9000
A Ha: μ≠9000
T 2 tailed test
T T Test
A 5%
R 2.50%
C 1.984
O
0.51
P
accept the null
hypothesis
FORMULA
X'-μ
S/(SQRT(N))
n 125
X'
9,238.10
47.5
s
5,236.05
0.51
μ 9000
√n

25. 25 | P a g e
11.18
P TEST
H1:- 50% of women who purchase grocery from kirana store feel
home delivery is important
Row Labels
Count of
Age
n 125
1 1
p 0.50
2 11
p' 0.76
3 16
q 0.50
4 58
5 37
p-p'
(blank) 2
sqrt(pq/n)
Grand Total 125
p-p' -0.26
58+37 95
p' 0.76
pq/n 0.002
0.04
(5.81)
N Ha:p=50%
A Ho:p≠50%
T two tail test
T ptest
A 5%
R 2.5%
+
C 1.96
O
(5.81)
P
5.81
reject the null
hypothesis

26. 26 | P a g e
H2:- 60% of women purchase grocery from Organized Retail Shop feal
home delivery is important.
Row Labels Count of Home Delivery Service
1 45
2 41
3 3
4 5
5 12
6 1
7 8
8 7
(blank) 1
Grand Total 123
Row Labels Count of Home Delivery Service
3 3
Grand Total 3
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Total
Total
N Ho: P=0.6 N 123
A Ha: P≠0.6 P' 0.02
T Prapotion test P 0.6
T TWO TAIL TEST Q 0.4
A 5%
R 2.5 P'-P
C SQRT(P*Q/N)

27. 27 | P a g e
O
(13.03)
P P'-P (0.58)
P*Q/N 0.001951
(P*Q/N) 0.04
47.5 47.5
2.5
2.5
-1.9
1.9
H3:- 40% of women who purchase grocery from Supermarket feel
home delivery is important.
Row Labels Count of Home Delivery Service
1 45

28. 28 | P a g e
2 41
3 3
4 5
5 12
6 1
7 8
8 7
(blank) 1
Grand Total 123
Row Labels Count of Home Delivery Service
2 41
Grand Total 41
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Total
Total

29. 29 | P a g e
N ho: n 123
A ha: p' 0.33
T
two
tail
test p 0.40
q 0.60
T
P-test
A 5% p'-p
R 2.5% sqrt(pq/n)
p'-p
(0.07)
C pq/n 0.04
O
0.04
P
-1.9
1.9
H4:- 45% of women who purchase grocery from Local Market feel
home delivery is important.
Row Labels
Count of Home Delivery
Service
1 45
2 41
3 3
4 5
5 12
6 1
7 8
8 7
(blank) 1

30. 30 | P a g e
Grand Total 123
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
N
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 (blank)
Ha:p =
45%
A Ho:p≠ 45%
T
two tail
test
T ptest
A 5%
R 2.5%
C 1.96
O Zo:
Total
Total

31. 31 | P a g e
(21.14)
P
n 125
p 0.45
p'
0.37
q 0.55
p-p'
sqrt(pq/n)
p'-p
-
0.08
sqrt(pq/n)
0.004
H5:- 55% of women who purchase grocery from
supermarket feel it is unimportant.
N Ho: P=55%
A Ha: P≠55%
T 2 tailed test
T P Test
A 5%
R 2.50%
C 1.96
O
50.39
P
accept the null
hypothesis
Formul
a: p'-p
sqrt(pq/n)
n 125
p 0.55
p'
11.18
q 0.45
-1.96
1.96

32. 32 | P a g e
37+11 48
sqrt(n)
11.18
50.39
sqrt(pq)
0.50
sqrt(pq/
n)
0.21
Row
Labels
Count of Store
Type Usually
Preferred
Academic 37
Finance 11
IT 4
Others 1
Sales &
marketing 1
Sales&
marketing 7
Technical 5
Grand
Total 66
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Total
H6:- The Proportion of working women purchase grocery from
kirana is 15%.
To…

33. 33 | P a g e
Row Labels Average of Store Type Usually Preferred
Entreprene
ur
3.67
Home
Maker
2.57
Service
3.07
Student
2.48
Grand Total 2
.76
N Ho: P=15%
A Ha: P≠15%
T 2 tailed test
T P Test
A 5%
R 2.50%
C 1.96

34. 34 | P a g e
O 30.11
P reject the null hypothesis
n 125
p 0.15
p' 1.11
q 0.85
sqrt(n) 11.18
sqrt(pq) 0.36
ANOVA TEST
URMILA
H1:- There is no variation in age across different store
formats
Row Labels Count of Store Type Usually Preferred
18 1
19 3
20 2
21 4
22 8
23 3
24 4
25 8
26 5
27 3
28 12
29 3
30 8
31 3
32 6
33 1
34 1

35. 35 | P a g e
35 8
36 5
38 2
39 3
40 4
41 1
42 2
43 3
44 1
45 6
46 1
47 1
48 5
50 2
51 1
52 3
Grand Total 123
Anova:
Single
Factor
SUMMARY
Groups
Count Sum
Avera
ge
Vari
ance
Column 1
33.00
1,13
9.00
34.52
105.
07
Column 2
33.00
123.
00
3.73
7.27
ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F
P-valu
e F crit
alpha
Between
Groups
15,64
1.00
15,64
278.
0.00
3.99
0.05

36. 36 | P a g e
0.24 0.24 45
Within
Groups
3,594.
79
64.0
0
56.17
Total
19,23
5.03
65.0
0
reject the
hypothesis
AJIT
H2: There is no variation in the average Typical Basket value
of women across different store formats
Row
Labels
Count of Store Type
Usually Preferred
70 1
100 1
120 1
200 3
250 1
300 4
350 1
400 1
450 1
500 5
550 1
700 2
800 1
1000 8
1500 6
1800 1
2000 15
2500 2
3000 12
3500 2
3800 1
4000 6
4500 8

37. 37 | P a g e
5000 12
5200 1
5500 5
7000 3
7500 1
8000 2
9000 2
10000 7
11000 2
12000 1
15000 1
18000 1
(blank) 1
Grand
Total 123
Anova: Single
Factor
SUMMARY
Groups Count Sum Average
Varianc
e
70.00
34.00
145,5
20.00
4,280.00
21,659,
963.64
1.00
34.00
121.0
0
3.56
13.77
ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F
P-valu
e
F
crit
Between
Groups
310,895,1
35.31
1.00
310,895,
135.31
28.71
0.00
3.99
Within
Groups
714,779,2
54.38
66.00
10,829,9
88.70
Total
1,025,674,
389.69
67.00

38. 38 | P a g e
Reject the
Null
20
15
10
5
POOJA
H3: There is no variation in family size across the
different store format.
Row Labels Count of Store Type Usually Preferred
2 5
3 17
4 38
5 31
6 14
7 2
8 9
9 1
10 2
11 1
15 1
24 1
29 1
Grand Total 123
Anova: Single
Factor
SUMMARY
Groups
Coun
t
Su
m
Avera
ge
Varia
nce
0
Total
Total

39. 39 | P a g e
2.00 12.0
0
131
.00
10.92 64.81
5.00
12.0
0
118
.00
9.83
165.7
9
ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F
P-valu
e
F
crit
alp
ha
Between
Groups
7.04
1.0
0
7.04
0.06
0.81
4.3
0
0.0
5
rejec
t null
Within
Groups
2,53
6.58
22.
00
115.3
0
Total
2,54
3.63
23.
00
REJECT THE
HYPOTHESIS
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Total
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 15 24 29
Total

40. 40 | P a g e
SHAHISTA
H4:There is no variation in the average age of women and
quick services.
Row Labels
Count of Quick
Service
18 1
19 3
20 2
21 4
22 8
23 3
24 4
25 8
26 5
27 3
28 12
29 3
30 8
31 3
32 5
33 1
34 1
35 8
36 5
38 2
39 3
40 4
41 1
42 3
43 3
44 1
45 6
46 1
47 1

41. 41 | P a g e
48 5
50 2
51 1
52 3
(blank)
Grand Total 123
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Anova:
Single
Factor
SUMMARY
Groups
Coun
t
Sum
Aver
age
Vari
anc
e
Column 1
33.0
0
1,13
9.00
34.5
2
105.
07
Column 2
33.0
0
123.
00
3.73
7.08
ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F
Total
P-valu
e
F
crit
Alp
ha
Between PLA
Total

42. 42 | P a g e
Groups 15,6
40.2
4
1.00 15,6
40.2
4
278.
92
0.0
0
3.9
9
0.0
5
TR
Within
Groups
3,58
8.79
64.0
0
56.0
7
Total
19,2
29.0
3
65.0
0
Reject the null
KANCHAN
H5: There is no variation in average monthly spend across
different store formats.
Row
Lab
els
Average of Total
Monthly Spend
1
8,261.36
2
9,238.10
3
6,333.33
4
8,600.00
5
15,000.00
6
2,500.00
7
8,250.00
8
5,428.57
Gra
nd
Tot
9,016.39

43. 43 | P a g e
al
Anova:
Single
Factor
SUMMARY
Groups
Cou
nt
Su
m
Av
era
ge
Var
ian
ce
Row
Labels 8 36 4.5 6
Average of
Total
636
79
Monthly
11.
51.
Spend 8
364
42
12
94
92
62
ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F
P-v
al
u
e
F
cri
t
alp
ha
Between
Groups
252
614
179 1
2.5
3E
+0
8
39.
01
59
8
0.
0
0
4.
60
0.
05
PLTA
R
Reject the
null
hypothesis
Within
Groups
906
448
76 14
64
74
63
4
Total
343
259
055 15
Reject the Null
H0: μ1 = μ2 = μ3 = μ4 = μ5 = μ6 =
μ7
= μ8
Ha: μ1 ≠ μ2 ≠ μ3 ≠ μ4 ≠ μ5 ≠ μ6 ≠ μ7 ≠ μ8
N = 8
C = 2

44. 44 | P a g e
16,000.00
14,000.00
12,000.00
10,000.00
8,000.00
6,000.00
4,000.00
2,000.00
-
Total
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
JAGDISH KA GOOGLE DOC ME ALREADY HAI OK…….
RAGHU
Total
H7:- There is no variation in the average family size across different store
formats.
Row Labels Count of Store Type Usually Preferred
2 5
3 17
4 38
5 31
6 14
7 2
8 9
9 1
10 2
11 1
15 1
24 1

45. 45 | P a g e
Anova: Single
Factor
29 1
Grand Total 123

46. 46 | P a g e
SUMMARY
Groups Count
Su
m
Aver
age
Varia
nce
Row Labels
13.00
13
3.0
0
10.2
3
65.53
Count of Store
Type Usually
Preferred
13.00
12
3.0
0
9.46
153.7
7
ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F
P-value
F
crit
alph
a
Between
Groups
3.85
1.0
0
3.85
0.04
0.85
4.26
0.05
PLT
AR
Within Groups
2,631
.54
24.
00
109.
65
Total
2,635
.38
25.
00
H0: μ1 =
μ2
= μ3 = μ4 = μ5 =
μ6
= μ7 = μ8 =
Ha: μ1 ≠
μ2
≠ μ3 ≠ μ4 ≠ μ5 ≠ μ6 ≠ μ7 ≠ μ8 ≠
N = 12
C = 2

47. 47 | P a g e
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
CHI SQUARE TESTS
URMILA
Total
H1:- The choice of the store is dependent on proximity. The women who feel
proximity is important the standard deviation is estimated to be 50
Row
Labels Count of Store Type Usually Preferred
4 60
5 48
Grand
Total 108
var
72.00
N Ha:σ2=50
A Ho:σ2≠50
T
two tail
test
0
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 15 24 29
Total

48. 48 | P a g e
T
chi
squaretest
A 5%
R 0.025
C
129.5,77.9
5
X2df,alph
a
X2107,0.02
5
O 154.08
P X2107,0.95
formul
a (n-1)*s2
σ2
7,704.0
0
154.08
18.16
77.95
129.5 154.08
reject the n ull hypothe sis
AJI T

49. 49 | P a g e
H2:- The choice of the store is independent on age is estimated
to be 35.
Row Labels Count of Store Type Usually Preferred
18 1
19 3
20 2
21 4
22 8
23 3
24 4
25 8
26 5
27 3
28 12
29 3
30 8
31 3
32 6
33 1
34 1
35 8
36 5
38 2
39 3
40 4
41 1
42 2
43 3
44 1
45 6
46 1
47 1
48 5
50 2
51 1
52 3
(blank)
Grand Total 123
N Ho: σ2=35 N 123 DF=122

50. 50 | P a g e
A Ha: σ2≠36 S2 8.991
T
Proportion
test SIGMA 35
T
TWO TAIL
TEST
A 5%
(N-
1)*S2
R 2.5 σ2
C
O
31.34
31.34
P
31.34
77.92
124.3221
ACCEPT THE
HYPOTHESIS
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Total
Total

51. 51 | P a g e
POOJA
H3:- The choice of the store is dependent on Income >3lakh
Row Labels Count of Store Type Usually Preferred
<3 Lakhs 24
>20 Lakhs 4
10 - 15 Lakhs 1
15- 20 Lakhs 1
3 - 5 Lakhs 1
5-10 Lakhs 24
Grand Total 55
stdev
11.55
N HO: σ2 = 300,000
A HA: σ2 ≠ > 300,000
T TWO TAIL TEST
T CHI SQUARE TEST
A 5%
R 0.025
C 11.0705 X2 (DF, ALPHA) (54,0.025)
O 0.002079 X2 (DF, ALPHA) (54,0.95)
P
FORMUL
A
(n-1)* s2
σ2
623.62
0.002079

52. 52 | P a g e
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0.00
<3 Lakhs >20 Lakhs 10 - 15
Lakhs
Total
15- 20
Lakhs
3 - 5 Lakhs 5-10 Lakhs
1.63538
11.07
reject the null
SHAHISTA H4:- The choice of the store is dependent on store choice
and urgency of purchase.
Values
Row Labels
Sum of Urgency Of
Purchase
Sum of Store
Image
1 144 161
Total

53. 53 | P a g e
2 135 149
3 9 12
4 15 13
5 37 37
6 1 5
7 24 28
8 24 24
Grand Total 389 429
Observed Frequency
ROW
LABELS
VALUES SUM OF URGENCY
OF PURCHASE
Sum of Store
Image
1 144 161 305 37%
2 135 149 284 34%
3 9 12 21 3%
4 15 13 28 3%
5 37 37 74 9%
6 1 5 6 1%
7 24 28 52 6%
8 24 24 48 6%
Grand
Total 389 429
Expected Frequency
Values
Row Labels Sum of Urgency Of Purchase
Sum of Store
Image
1
144
158
2
135
148
3
10
11
4
13
15
5
35
38
6
3
3
7
25
27
8
23
25

54. 54 | P a g e
Σ(fo-fe)^2/fe
Values
Row Labels Sum of Urgency Of Purchase
Sum of Store
Image
1
0.00
0.04
2
0.00
0.02
3
0.10
0.11
4
0.21
0.16
5
0.09
0.05
6
1.21
1.14
7
0.02
0.04
8
0.06
0.03
N
H0: Types of store choice is dependent on the availability of the
Store image and Urgency of Purchase.
A
Ha: Types of store choice is not dependent on the availability of the
store image and Urgency of Purchase.
T Chi-squared
T
righ
t-tail
A acceptance region
95
%
alph
a
5%
R rejection region 5%
C =chiinv(alpha, df)
df = (C-
1)*(r-1)
O (Fo-Fe)^2/Fe

55. 55 | P a g e
P
=chitest(observed
array, expected array)
PGT
A
P
VA
LU
E
0.92
OB
SE
RV
ED
11.24
CRI
TIC
AL
14.07
ACCEP T NULL
200
150
100
50
0
KANCHAN
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
H5:- The choice of the store is dependent on Family
Composition is estimated to be 5
Row Labels Count of Store Type Usually Preferred
5 31
6 14
7 2
8 9
9 1
10 2
Grand Total 59
SD
11.55
Sum of Urgency Of Purchase
Sum of Store Image

56. 56 | P a g e
N Ha:σ2=5
A Ho:σ2≠5
T right tail test
T chi squaretest
A 5%
R 0.025
C 83.2977,43.18797
O 133.98
P
reject the null
hypothesis
X258,0.025
X258,0.95
n 59
s^2 11.55
σ^2 5
formula
= (n-1)*s2
σ2
4
3
.
1
8
7
9
7
8
3
.
2
9
7
7
-
2
.
3
1
JAGDISH
H6: The choice of store is dependent on store image is
estimated to be 50.

57. 57 | P a g e
Row Labels Count of Proximity
1 45
2 41
3 3
4 5
5 12
6 1
7 8
8 7
Grand Total 122
SD 17.47
N Ha:σ2=50
A Ho:σ2≠50
T two tail test
T chi square test
A 5%
R 0.025
C 83.2977,43.1879
7
O 42.29
P reject the null
hypothesis
X2 121,0.025
X2 121,0.95
n 122
s^2 17.47
σ^
2
50

58. 58 | P a g e
RAGHU
H7: The choice of store is dependent on parking space is
estimated to be 30.
Row Labels Count of Parking Space
1 45
2 41
3 3
4 5
5 12
6 1
7 8
8 7
Grand Total 122
SD 17.47
N Ha:σ2=30
A Ho:σ2≠30
T two tail test

59. 59 | P a g e
T chi square test
A 5%
R 0.025
C 83.2977,43.18797
O 70.48
P reject the null hypothesis
X2,121,0.025
X2,121,0.95
n 122
s^2 17.47
σ^2 30
Formula = (n-1)*s2
σ2
50
40
30
20
10
0
Total
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Total

60. 60 | P a g e
43.18797
83.2977
70.48

61. 61 | P a g e

62. 62 | P a g e

63. 63 | P a g e
PROPOSED HYPOTHESIS
T TEST
H1:- The average age of women who buy grocery from Organized Retail Shop is equal
to 25 .
H2:- The average age of women who buy grocery from Supermarket is equal to 30.
H3:- The average age of women who buy grocery from Kirana stores is equal to 30.
H4:- The average spend per visit to an Organized Retail Shop to purchase grocery is
equal to Rs 500.
H5:- The average spend per visit to a Supermarket to purchase grocery is equal to Rs
500.
H6:- The average age of women who buy grocery from Mall is equal to 35.
H7: The average income of women who buy grocery from Organized Retail Shop is
more than RS. 30,000
H8:The average income of women who buy grocery from Kirana is less than RS. 30,000
P-TEST

64. H1:- 50% of women who purchase grocery from kirana store feel home delivery is
important
H2:- 60% of women purchase grocery from Organized Retail Shop feel home delivery is
important.
H3:- 40% of women who purchase grocery from Supermarket feel home delivery is
important.
H4:- 45% of women who purchase grocery from Local Market feel home delivery is
important.
H5:- 55% of women who purchase grocery from supermarket feel it is unimportant.
H6:- The Proportion of working women purchase grocery from kirana is 15%.
H7: The Proportion of women purchase grocery from Organized Retail Shop due to
discounts is 40%
H8:The Proportion of women purchase grocery from supermarket due to discounts is
45%.
64 | P a g e
CHI SQUARE TEST
H1:- The choice of the store is dependent on proximity is estimated to be 50.
H2:- The choice of the store is independent on age is estimated to be 35.
H3:- The choice of the store is dependent on Income.
H4:- The choice of the store is dependent on Ambience.
H5:- The choice of the store is dependent on Family Composition is estimated to be 5.
H6: The choice of store is dependent on promotion.
H7: The choice of store is dependent on discount.
H8: The choice of store is dependent on home delivery
ANOVA
H1: There is no variation in the average age of women across different
store formats
H2: There is no variation in the average Typical Basket value of women
across different store formats.

65. H4:There is no variation in the average age of women and average income
across the store formats
H5: There is no variation in average monthly spend across different store
formats.
65 | P a g e
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS

66. 66 | P a g e

67. 67 | P a g e

68. 68 | P a g e