Lifeline puppy rescue research report

MSU Denver- Market Research Team
Lifeline Puppy Rescue
A Market Research Project
12/7/2013
By: Jordan Baham, Jonathan Cao, Deonnah Carolus, Dan Feldman, Alix Gorshow,
Keith Jellick, Christopher Kraich, Chad Lehl, Jarren McClendon, Taylor Pickering,
Matt Ramey, Morgan Swaney, Taylor Swanson, Laura Tschida, Cynthia Watts

2 Lifeline Puppy Rescue
Contents
The Decision Statement and Research Objectives for the project that will be
addressed in the qualitative study...................................................................... 3
Brief Description of the Target Audience............................................................ 3
Description of Methodology: What type of qualitative study will you conduct?
Why? .................................................................................................................. 4
Process for Recruiting Participants ..................................................................... 4
Details of Implementation: Where, when, what roles will each team member
fulfill?.................................................................................................................. 4
Research Guide: List of questions, approach, and timing.................................... 5
Qualitative Report ................................................................................................. 6
Introduction........................................................................................................ 6
Overview of Data Collection ............................................................................... 6
Summary of Results............................................................................................ 6
Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 7
Survey Draft Process.............................................................................................. 9
Data Analysis ....................................................................................................... 10
Initial Adoption................................................................................................. 10
Follow-Up After Adoption................................................................................. 10
Volunteer and Employee Role Definition.......................................................... 11
Operational Process and Issues ........................................................................ 11
Operational Process and Issues: Adoption Process........................................... 13
Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 14
Analysis Draft Coding Sheet and Analysis Plan..................................................... 16
Coding Sheet Key ................................................................................................. 23
Frequencies ...................................................................................................... 23

Life Line Puppy Rescue Proposal
The Decision Statement and Research Objectives for the project
that will be addressed in the qualitative study
Our Research Objectives are to gain a better understanding on how and why customers
are having a negative experience when adopting a puppy from Lifeline Puppy Rescue. We would
like to find out the internal and external issues that the consumer is facing while engaging in the
adoption process, and then evaluate from both point of views. We also hope to gain more
knowledge about their brand image from an external point of view by receiving customer
feedback. Areas of research will include:
1. Initial adoption
2. Follow up after adoption
3. Volunteer and employee role definition and training
4. Operational process and issues
a. Adoption process
Brief Description of the Target Audience
The target audience of Lifeline Puppy Rescue is people who are dog and puppy lovers
and looking to grow their family with the addition of a four legged friend. This specifically
includes young and middle aged couples and families. Families with kids that are over the age of
6 is a better fit but Lifeline will not turn people away. They are also targeting single people that
want to add a companion to their lives. What sets Lifeline apart from other pet stores is the fact
that they are a rescue. This means that they are looking to attract customers that want to save a
life and help a rescue.

Description of Methodology: What type of qualitative study will
you conduct? Why?
We will be conducting an interview to gain data on customers’ experience when they
come to adopt/rescue at Lifeline Puppy Rescue. We will interview customers when they walk out
of or into the adoption facility. By doing this, we can record accurate data about their
experiences with Lifeline and the adoption process. Also, we are creating a focus group to get
more data from previous adopters from Lifeline. With this data, we can better understand if and
why there is a negative customer experience and what actions can be taken to correct this
perception.
Process for Recruiting Participants
Our process for recruiting participants will consist of the team using the available email
database and sending inquiries about participating in our surveys. Also, the team will be there on
adoption days to recruit participants face to face. Of course, because tension seems to run high
on adoption days, we will try to focus on keeping our conversations light for the participants.
The goal is to help understand the process from the adopter’s point of view, while not adding an
extra burden to the process.
Details of Implementation: Where, when, what roles will each
team member fulfill?
Jonathan, Taylor, Cynthia, Jordan, and Laura performed the qualitative research and
summarized their results in the qualitative study. This group is responsible for writing the
proposal, conducting the research, and writing the report. Daniel, Alix, Deonnah, and Jarren
were in charge of the survey development. They created the format and coordinated the pre-
testing for the survey. Chad, Jordan, Chris, Taylor, and Cynthia collected the survey data. They
will be organizing incoming data from the research. Morgan, Chad, Jarren, Alix, and Chris were
in charge of analyzing the data. They determined the strategy for data analysis. Taylor, Laura,
Matt, Taylor and Keith created the final presentation and project report and presented their
findings to the class.

Research Guide: List of questions, approach, and timing
We approached the participants after they finished the process of adopting a puppy or
while they were waiting for the mandatory adoption class to begin. After that we asked them
several questions about their experience with Lifeline Puppy. Our list of questions included:
-Is this your first time adopting a dog? From Lifeline Puppy Rescue?
-How did you hear about Lifeline Puppy Rescue?
-Do you own other pets? If so, how many and what of?
-What was your first impression when walking into Lifeline Puppy Rescue?
-Did you find the volunteers to be helpful?- Do you have any recommendations on how
they could better help your needs next time?
-Internally or externally suggestions?
-How long did your adoption process in total take?
-Was this a positive or negative experience and why?
-Would you come back again to adopt? Recommend us to others? Become a volunteer?
Donate in the future?
-What could we change to make your experience and the experience of future customers
more pleasurable?

Qualitative Report
Introduction
Our main research objective is to understand the cause or causes of the negative customer
experiences at Lifeline Puppy Rescue. The key areas that we are focusing are the initial adoption,
the follow up after adoption, and the operations that may affect the adoption process. We
conducted direct observations and interviews with future adopters, in order to gather data about
the overall customer experience. We have also researched secondary sources from various
websites such as Yelp, Yellowpages, and Google Reviews. These sources helped us define some
of the negative image problems. With the information we gathered, we evaluated the adopter’s
experience, so that the negative experiences can be mitigated.
Overview of Data Collection
We conducted our qualitative study by formatting a list of questions that pertained to our
current research objectives, and then we conducted short interviews with the adopters subsequent
to the adoption process. We chose to conduct these interviews after the customers completed the
adoption process, so that the responses would be instinctive and accurate. We felt that ‘live’
interviews were most appropriate because we also were able to view the facilities. This hands on
approach was successful for gathering data. Each interview took no longer than ten minutes as
we did not want to delay the customer longer than necessary. Approximately ten people were
interviewed following the adoption process. We administered these interviews on Saturday,
September 28th, 2013.
Summary of Results
From the results of the qualitative research, almost all of the customers that were
interviewed were either in a relationship or had a family with children. Many of the subjects’
first impressions of Lifeline were that the area was nice and open, but also looked tattered. One
specific customer mentioned that the appearance of the front entrance of Lifeline made the
premises “eerie” to begin with. Almost everyone interviewed heard about Lifeline from friends
or family by way of recommendations.

We have found that the process for adopting the puppy is too long, according to the
customers. One of the reasons why this is a long process is because adopters are required to
attend a class about training and medical information about their puppies before they leave.
Several customers mentioned that the orientation/class was too long and involved too much
information, as the adopters are anxious to get their new puppy home. It was also mentioned the
class instructor talks too fast for all the information to be processed. We observed the adoption
process from beginning to end and noticed that for the adopter, the process took up to two hours
from arrival to departure with a puppy.
Another observation we found is that it is confusing to get help because customers were
not sure who the volunteers were. The lack of name tags or volunteer shirts could be a cause of
this, but generally all customers stated that the volunteers were helpful.
Every customer interviewed stated that they would absolutely recommend Lifeline to
other people interested in adopting or rescuing a puppy. Where only half of the customers
interviewed said they would become a volunteer, all of them said they would donate to Lifeline.
Conclusion
In conclusion, our research is designed to gain a better understanding on how and why
customers are having a negative experience. From this research we found that there were five
main problems:
● The first impression of the facility
● The lack of differentiation between volunteers and customers
● Not all the volunteers being fully trained
● The lack of organization
● The adopter training class
○ The length
○ The amount of information
○ The pace of the presenter
Even with these issues we still found that many adopters had an overall positive
experience and would come back to Lifeline Puppy Rescue to adopt or donate.
Moving forward into the next part of our study we used this information to create a
survey that will be sent to past adopters. We will ask questions that cover the topics of initial

adoption, follow up after the adoption, and the processes that may correlate to a negative
experience. Our end goal is to give Lifeline recommendations on how to make the adoption a
positive experience from beginning to end.

Survey Draft Process
The way we went about gathering the questions for the survey was through qualitative
research. We went to Lifeline and observed the step by step process that the customer goes
through to adopt their puppy. During the teams visit we observed wait times, puppy interaction,
the selection process, and the adoption class. When we were ready to start drafting the actual
survey, we wanted to focus our questions around the overall adoption process including; what
the customers overall perception was, the quality of their interactions with the staff and
volunteers, the wait time, and the post adoption session. By focusing on these aspects and the
overall customer experience, we wanted to design the survey in such a way that it would provide
data that would reflect how Lifeline could improve the adoption experience.

Data Analysis
Initial Adoption
The first question in the survey regarding “initial adoption” used an ordinal category
scale that assessed level of satisfaction with the adoption process, adoption paperwork, and
promptness. We used this scale structure to allow the respondents flexibility in ratings. Of 346
respondents an overwhelming majority responded that they agreed or strongly agreed that their
service was well structured, organized, and prompt.
Some of the most encouraging results include a majority of respondents” strongly
agreeing” that the puppies appeared healthy, clean, well fed, and well cared for. Additionally an
even amount of respondents either “agree” or “strongly agree” that the price of the puppy was
reasonable and a majority “agreed” that there was a wide variety of puppies to choose from.
Follow-Up After Adoption
The health of your new puppy is of great concern at Lifeline Puppy Rescue, and Lifeline
can proudly represent that of 284 responses concerning the puppy’s health, 149 or 52.46%
customers have experienced 0 health problems within the first 6 months of adopting. 174
customers or 61.70% experienced 0 health problems with their puppy 6 months to a year after
their adoption. Less than 2% of the respondent’s experienced more than 3 puppy health related
problems within a year of their adoption. Lifeline can be proud and capitalize on the fact that the
majority of the puppies they intake have had little to zero health problems.
Lifeline Puppy Rescue relies a lot on returning customers for their cliental; more than
60.07% of customers are returning customers. Of the results, 27.11% have adopted more than
twice from Lifeline. Only 5.86% of Lifeline customers have never adopted before. From the
survey results we were able to conclude that Lifeline’s main source of revenue is generated from
returning customers and not through new customers.
The after adoption follow up process was found to be important amongst customers.
Many customers expressed their concern for an after adoption follow up. The majority of
customers would prefer a follow up via email then phone in means of contacting when receiving
a follow up check –up in regards to their new puppy. Customers from Lifeline would like to be
contacted within the first year of their adoption.

When it came to why the customer would recommend Lifeline Puppy Rescue to a friend
or family the most important reasons respectively in order were, my puppy, the health of the
puppy, the variety of puppies, the helpfulness of the staff, the cleanliness of the facility, the
helpfulness of the volunteers, the organization of the staff and volunteers, size of the facility and
then other. The majority of responses from customers answered that they would agree to
strongly agree that they would recommend us to others
Volunteer and Employee Role Definition
85.6% of people believed that the presenter in the adoption session was informative. An
overwhelming majority of respondents agreed that the adoption staff and volunteers were able
and willing to assist with the customer’s adoption. They found the volunteers to be friendly and
easy to identify.
Next we felt that it was appropriate to evaluate the level of satisfaction for the adoption
session length. The most common selection was “Satisfied” with 42% followed by “Neutral”
(25.5%) and “Very Satisfied” (23.53). While it is encouraging that “Satisfied” was the largest
response, over one third of the respondents felt a satisfaction level of “neutral” or less.
Though not everyone believed that the length of the session was “satisfying”, 78% of
respondents believed that the session was informative and 63% believed it was necessary. It may
appear that an agreeably informative session that is too long could be a worthy trade off but after
our regression analysis we found that length of the adoption session was strongly correlated to
likelihood of customers recommending Lifeline to others.
Operational Process and Issues
To evaluate the overall adoption process, we asked respondents questions referring to the
initial introduction of customers to Lifeline’s operation. The most common way that customers
were informed about Lifeline was through and online search for information ranking at 38.04%.
The second and third most prevalent ways consumers were informed about Lifeline was through
a friend or the actual Lifeline website at 23.63% and 17.29% respectively. The least significant
way to learn about Lifeline according to our respondents was through print advertisements.
Our survey addressed the issue of the ease of locating the Lifeline establishment. The
general consensus resulted that on a scale from not being able to easily locate to locating with
ease ranked from one to five, majority resulted in a four being slightly less than extremely easy

to locate. The average recorded in at a 4.75 from 125 respondents out of a total of 345. Only five
respondents found it very inconvenient to find, and only 26 found it less than average to identify.
99 respondents found the property neither easy nor difficult to discover.
We inquired from respondents how the company could better advertise their space and
make it more convenient to locate. They were asked to rank different choices such as website
maps, directions, and more frequent or larger signs according to their preference. The results
favored having a larger sign for the location to be more apparent from the road. This option had
the most respondents but the second highest average. The highest average with the second most
respondents was for Lifeline to have more signs along the route. Having a map on the website
and better directions on the website were less important ranking below being easy to find.
Our survey addressed the overall satisfaction of Lifeline’s customer’s experiences in
different areas of the process. Respondents were asked to rank the training class, the
convenience, staff and volunteers, communication with Lifeline, and the follow-up process. The
general consensus on the training class was that most respondents were neutral or neither very
satisfied or very dissatisfied. They rated the satisfaction of the convenience of the Lifeline
process as satisfying. The staff and volunteer experience was the highest level of satisfaction
with an average response of satisfied but the highest amount of very satisfied customers. The
experience with the level of communication with Lifeline was generally satisfied, but also had
the greatest amount of respondents that were very dissatisfied. The lowest average level of
satisfaction is in regards to the follow-up process where with the highest level of respondents to
the survey question, majority of the respondents were either neutral or had some level of
dissatisfaction with the after adoption process.
Respondents were asked about the ease of the communication process with the Lifeline
team. Customers evaluated the company as being fairly average on being able to get in touch
with someone from Lifeline, finding it neither extremely easy nor difficult to contact them.
According to our descriptive statistics model from running a basic data analysis using SPSS, the
standard deviation for this question was .989. This shows that the ease of communication had no
significant impact on the customer experience of respondents. Majority of respondents found it
relatively easier to communicate with the staff and volunteers opposed to being a difficult
process. Respondents didn’t seem to have an overwhelmingly time connecting with Lifeline.

When inquiring about the most used forms of communication between respondents and
Lifeline the most substantial channels used were through phone and email. There were a large
percentage of respondents who did not engage in any contact with the company at 34.72%. The
use of the Lifeline website and Facebook were substantial less frequently utilized, Facebook
being used only 2.78% of the time. Some respondents did engage in multiple types of contact
with the organization.
Operational Process and Issues: Adoption Process
We gauged the amount of time that it took for the organization to respond to the
customers who had communicated with Lifeline. Respondents were contacted mostly within the
same day, one day, or one week following their initial contact attempt rating at 21.91%, 34.27%,
and 24.72% respectively. For some it did take around two weeks, three weeks, one month, or
more than one month, but this was not a large area of concern. The response that did stand out in
a negative light was that 14.61% of respondents shared that they never received any type of a
reply from Lifeline after contacting them. This is certainly an area that should be considered for
improvement to guarantee satisfaction and customer loyalty.
Addressing our objective of ensuring customer satisfaction throughout the adoption
process, we included questions in our survey that focused on who our respondents and the
Lifeline clientele are. We found that the households that Lifeline puppies reside in usually have
two to three people at an overwhelming majority of 66.79%. The next most occurring response
consisted of households with four to five residents. Roughly 9.49% of respondents shared that
they were the only resident in their home followed by only four respondents whose homes
contained six to eight people. The conclusion can be made that the target market Lifeline best
caters to is couple or family sized households with multiple residents.
Further evaluating the target market that Lifeline appeals to, we asked respondents how
many children they have. Surprisingly, 59.85% of respondents have no children. The next
highest response came from those with two children at 15.69%. 14.23% had only one child and
8.39% had three kids. There were only four people who had four children, and one person who
had five or more children. This solidifies that the target that Lifeline most appeals to is couple
and family oriented households.

The household income level of respondents was relatively across the board. The average
household income was just over $75,000. There were only sixteen of 259 respondents who had
less than a $25,000 annual salary. The majority of responses came from customers who have a
household income of $101,000 or more at 27.41%. The $26,000 to $50,000, $51,000 $75,000,
and $76,000 to $100,000 household income ranges had 23.55%, 24.32%, and 18.53%
respectively. Clearly the Puppy Rescue clientele have above average household income levels.
Conclusion
Overall our findings on Lifeline Puppy Rescue have been extremely positive. Every
component of the Lifeline adoption process has been positive for customers. People have a
pleasant experience viewing and selecting puppies, believe that the facilities are clean and that
the puppies are well taken care of, think that the Basic Training Course is informative and
valuable, and now have a happy, healthy puppy in their homes.
After reviewing our qualitative and quantitative results we have a few recommendations
that we believe will help Lifeline Puppy Rescue. The biggest suggestion that our research
supports is a need for a follow up within a year. With a follow-up lifeline establishes a new
channel of communication. If this channel is well maintained than Lifeline customers are more
likely to recommend the rescue to other potential customers. There are two dominant means that
people want to be reached. If Lifeline decides to incorporate an immediate follow up (within 1
week to one month) customers prefer to be reached by phone call. If the follow up time line is
between 1 and 6 months, customers prefer to be contacted by email. A majority of customers
prefer to be contacted between one week and three months so our research suggests that either an
email or email system would be received well. Due to a small staff, it may be more feasible to
establish a single email distribution system that is queued when new adoptions are entered into
the Lifeline databases. Please refer to the following charts for further information:
Another aspect that could benefit Lifeline Puppy Rescue would be more, larger signs.
Both our quantitative analysis and data analysis indicate that the first impression of the facility
appeared tattered and some people had a difficult time recognizing the actual building. More
signs could help establish a newer, renovated brand image to prospective and visiting customers.
Large signs would further reinforce a new renovated brand image and could potentially draw in
the local population that is considering a new addition to their family.

Our qualitative analysis indicated that employees and volunteers were difficult for the
customers to identify. A simple, inexpensive fix for this problem would be giving staff members
a t-shirt or name tag. Name tags could be a good decision because they are cheap, replaceable,
and effective identifiers for a volunteer core that may have a high turnover. T-shirts could also be
a good idea. Although they are more expensive, it adds a new channel of marketing as volunteers
could potentially wear their shirts in different areas of Denver that may not have exposure to
Lifeline Puppy Rescue.
Finally, there is a strong statistical correlation between customer recommendation and
word of mouth marketing with volunteers being able and willing to assist customers. We believe
that this is easily achievable with the addition of staff shirts and/or name tags. By eliminating
staff recognition confusion, customers can easily find volunteers and staff that can help them.

Appendix A:
Analysis Draft Coding Sheet and Analysis Plan
1. LEARN Frequency distribution
1 friend
2 family
3 website
4 online search
5 print ad
6 other
2. ELOCAL Frequency distribution, Cross-
tab with FIND
1 got lost
2 not easy
3 neutral
4 easy
5 very easy
3. FIND1 (larger sign)Frequency
distribution, Cross-tab with each other
FIND2 (signs)
FIND3 (map)
FIND4 (better directions)
FIND5 (other)
4. A. FACIL1 Mean, linear regression with
all FACIL and recommend as dependent var
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
4. B. FACIL2 Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
4. C. FACIL3 Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
5. A. PROC1 Mean, linear regression with
all proc and recommend as dependent var
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree

5. B. PROC2 Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
5. C. PROC3 Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
6. TCLASS (1 - 4 worst - best) Mean
TIME 1 - 4
QUALITY 1 - 4
NECESS 1 - 4
PRESENT 1 - 4
7. CLENGH Mean, linear regression with
cinfo being dependent???
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
8. CINFO Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
9. CNECES Frequency distribution,
ANOVA with cinfo being dependent??
1 unnecessary
2 neither
3 necessary
10. CPRES Frequency distribution, ANOVA
with clengh being dependent??
1 uninformative
2 neither
3 informative
11. A. STVO1 (able to assist) Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
11. B. STVO2 (easy to identify) Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree

3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
11. C. STVO3 (Friendly) Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
11. D. STVO4 (difference between staff and
volunteer) Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
12. A. PUP1 (variety) Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
12. B. PUP2 (price) Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
12. C. PUP3 (healthy) Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
12. D. PUP4 (clean) Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
12. E. PUP5 (well fed) Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
12. F. PUP6 (well cared for) Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither

4 agree
5 strongly agree
13. HEALTH1 Mean
0 - 0
1 - 1
2 - 2
3 - 3
4 - 4
5 - 5+
6 does not apply
14. HEALTH2 Mean
0 - 0
1 - 1
2 - 2
3 - 3
4 - 4
5 - 5+
6 does not apply
15. CONTACT1 Mean
1 very difficult
2 difficult
3 neutral
4 easy
5 very easy
16. CONTACT2 Frequency distribution
1 phone
2 website
3 email
4 facebook
5 other
6 i did not try to contact lifeline
17. REPLY Frequency distribution
1 - same day
2 - 1 day
3 - 1 week
4 - 2 weeks
5 - 3 weeks
6 - 1 month
7 - more than 1 month
8 - never received reply (this is a
conditional question if 6 was
selected in 16 this question does not
show)
18. FOLLOW1 Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
19. FOLLOW2 Mean
1 strongly disagree

2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
20. A. WHEN1 within first week Frequency
distribution, Cross-tab with all WHEN
(These are all filtered that if a follow up is
important)
1 phone
2 text
3 email
4 mail
5 in-person
20. B. WHEN2 with first month Frequency
distribution
1 phone
2 text
3 email
4 mail
5 in-person
20. C. WHEN3 within 3 months Frequency
distribution
1 phone
2 text
3 email
4 mail
5 in-person
20. D. WHEN4 within 6 months Frequency
distribution
1 phone
2 text
3 email
4 mail
5 in-person
20. E WHEN5 within first year Frequency
distribution
1 phone
2 text
3 email
4 mail
5 in-person
20. F. WHEN6 after first year
Frequency distribution
1 phone
2 text
3 email
4 mail
5 in-person
21. A. OVERS1 training class Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree

3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
21. B. OVERS2 convenience Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
21. C. OVERS3 staff and volunteers Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
21. D. OVERS4 follow up Mean
1 strongly disagree
2 disagree
3 neither
4 agree
5 strongly agree
22. RECOMMEND Mean, ANOVA with
whyrec & whynrec (these as indep vars)
1 very unlikely
2 unlikely
3 undecided
4 likely
5 very likely
23. WHYREC rank 1 - 10, least important -
most important Frequency distribution
RMPUP
RHELPS
RHELPV
RORG
RCLEAN
RSIZE
RVARPUP
RHEAPUP
ROTHER
24. WHYNREC rank 1 - 10, least important
- most important Frequency distribution
NMPUP
NHELPS
NHELPV
NORG
NCLEAN
NSIZE
NVARPUP
NHEAPUP
NOTHER
25. TIMES

1 - 1
2 - 2
3 - 3
4 - 4+
5 - i have not adopted a puppy from
lifeline
26. PUPWHEN Frequency distribution
1 - today
2 - less than 6 months
3 - 6 months to a year
4 - one year to two years
5 - two years or more
27. HH
1 - 1
2 - 2 or 3
3 - 4 or 5
4 - 6 or 8
5 - 9+
28. KIDS
1 - none
2 - 1
3 - 2
4 - 3
5 - 4
6 - 5+
29. INCOME Frequency distribution
1 - less than $25,000
2 - $26,000 - $50,000
3 - $51,000 - $75,000
4 - $76,000 - $100,000
5 - $101,000 or more

Coding Sheet Key
Frequencies
 Compare “puppy questions” (PUP1, PUP2, PUP3, PUP4, PUP5, PUP6) to
“recommendations” (WHYREC and WHYNREC) - Factorial ANOVA or Logistic
Regression
 Compare “children in the home” (KIDS) to “recommendations” (WHYREC and
WHYNREC) - Factorial ANOVA or Logistic Regression
 Compare “overall experience” (OVERS1, OVERS2, OVERS3, OVERS4) to “contact of
Lifeline” (CONTACT1 or CONTACT2) - Factorial ANOVA or Logistic Regression or
Linear Regression
 Compare “follow-up” (FOLLOW1 and FOLLOW2) to “contact” (CONTACT1 and
CONTACT2) - Factorial ANOVA or Logistic Regression or Linear Regression
 Compare “health of puppy” (HEALTH1 and HEALTH2) to “recommendations”
(WHYREC and WHYNREC) - One-way ANOVA
 For the categories: “overall adoption process was structured” (PROC1), and “adoption
paperwork was organized” (PROC2) and the “adoption process was completed and
promptly” (PROC3)- We will find the mean.
 “I was satisfied with the length of the adoption session” (CLENGH) - We will find the
mean.
 Compare “I was satisfied with the length of the adoption session” (CLENGH) to the
“content of the session was informative” (CINFO) - Linear regression
 “How many health problems did your puppy have from adoption to 6 months”
(HEALTH1) - We can find the mean.
 Compare “how easy was it to get in touch with someone from lifeline” (CONTACT1) to
“how did you try to contact lifeline” (CONTACT2) - Cross-tabulation
 Compare “overall experience” (OVERS1, OVERS2, OVERS3, OVERS4) to “length of
session” (CLENGH) - Linear regression
 Compare “length of session” (CLENGH) to “content of session” (CINFO) - Linear
regression

 Compare “variety of puppies” (PUP1) to “overall satisfaction” (OVERS1, OVERS2,
OVERS3, OVERS4) - Linear regression
 Compare “reasonable price of puppy” (PUP2) to “household income” (INCOME) -
Linear regression or Factorial ANOVA or Logistic Regression
 Compare “when did you receive a reply from lifeline” (WHEN1, WHEN2, WHEN3,
WHEN4, WHEN5, WHEN6) to “how satisfied are you with the current follow up
process” (FOLLOW1 and FOLLOW2) - Factorial ANOVA or Logistic Regression or
Linear Regression
 Compare “overall experience” () and “satisfaction questions” (OVERS1, OVERS2,
OVERS3, OVERS4) to “likelihood to recommend”(RECOMMEND)- Correlate entire
experience and repeat business and recommendations
 Compare “facility cleanliness” (FACIL1) to “logistics questions” () - To establish
correlations between potential first impressions
 Compare “adoption session” (TCLASS, CLENGH, CINFO, CNECES, CPRES) to
“convenience questions” (OVERS2) - To establish a potential correlation between
perception of adoption class quality and facility quality (timeliness, convenience, useful)
 Compare “staff and volunteer questions” (STVO1, STVO2, STVO3, STVO4) to “puppy
questions” (PUP1, PUP2, PUP3, PUP4, PUP5, PUP6) - Understand customer perception
of if the staff is doing a good job
 Compare “adoption session questions” (TCLASS, CLENGH, CINFO, CNECES,
CPRES) to “puppy questions” (PUP1, PUP2, PUP3, PUP4, PUP5, PUP6) -To understand
if the current class is working
 Compare “follow-up questions” (FOLLOW1 or FOLLOW2) to “likelihood to
recommend” (RECOMMEND) -Does follow up influence recommendation and repeat
business
 Compare “initial communication” (CONTACT1, CONTACT2, and REPLY ) to “follow
up questions” (FOLLOW1 or FOLLOW2) - To understand customer perception of
quality of communication

 Compare “demographics” (HH, KIDS, INCOME) to “overall satisfaction of all
categories” (OVERS1, OVERS2, OVERS3, OVERS4) - To understand how results vary
by demographics
 Compare “length of the adoption process” (CLENGH) to “satisfaction of the training
session” (OVERS1) - Linear regression
 Compare “length of training session” (CLENGH) with “satisfaction of the training
session” (OVERS1) - Linear regression
 Compare “overall adoption satisfaction” (OVERS1, OVERS2, OVERS3, OVERS4) to
“recommendation” (RECOMMEND) - Factorial ANOVA or Logistic Regression
 Compare “puppy satisfaction” (PUP1, PUP2, PUP3, PUP4, PUP5, PUP6) to “health
problems after adoption” (HEALTH1 and HEALTH2) - Linear Regression
 Compare “overall adoption satisfaction” (OVERS1, OVERS2, OVERS3, OVERS4) to
“overall satisfaction of staff and volunteers” (STVO1, STVO2, STVO3, STVO4) - Linear
Regression

Lifeline puppy rescue research report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Lifeline puppy rescue research report

Similar to Lifeline puppy rescue research report (20)

More from Taylor Pickering

More from Taylor Pickering (6)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Lifeline puppy rescue research report