A TWO-FACTOR MODEL FOR SERVICE QUALITY MANAGEMENT:

THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT AND AN APPLICATION TO CO-

OP MART NGUYEN DINH CHIEU, VIET NAM.
by
Ho Dac Nguyen Nga
A research study submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Business Administration.
Examination Committee Dr. Do Ba hang !Chairman"
Dr. #redric $. %&ierc'e(
Dr. Clemens Bechter
Nationality )ietnamese
*re+ious degree Bachelor of Ci+il Engineering
HCMC ,ni+ersity of -echnology
Ho Chi Minh City. )ietnam
%cholarship donor /o+ernment of %&it'erland 0%DC !%A)"
Asian 1nstitute of -echnology
%chool of Management
Bang(o(. -hailand
April 2334
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
1 am most grateful to Dr. Do Ba hang. my 5esearch Ad+isor and Chairman of 5esearch
Committee. for his in+aluable guidance. constructi+e suggestions. and constant
encouragement throughout the course of my research study. His profound (no&ledge and
boundless enthusiasm are a great inspiration for me to conduct this research.
1 &ould li(e to express sincere than(s to Dr. #redric $. %&ierc'e( and Dr. Clemens
Bechter for their +aluable contribution in ser+ing as 5esearch Committee members. as &ell
as for their constructi+e comments and critical suggestions on the research study.
-he sincerest than(s come to the %&iss6A1-6)ietnam Management De+elopment
*rogramme !%A)" and Asian 1nstitute of -echnology !A1-". all the faculty members.
staffs. and friends &ho contribute greatly to my learning progress.
-han(s are also extended to )ietnam Asia *acific Economic Center !)A*EC". managers
and staffs of many supermar(ets in Ho Chi Minh City. especially managers and staffs of
%aigon Co6op. for helping me in data collection.
7ast but not least. 1 &ould li(e to express my deep gratitude to my family and my
girlfriend. &ho pro+ide continuous supports to me during my learning process and the
course of this research study.
i
ABSTRACT
-he goal of this research is to in+estigate the quality le+el of Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh
Chieu in the perception of customers in order to help management impro+e the store8s
quality properly.
#or the purpose abo+e. a ne& quality model. called 9-&o6factor model:. is de+eloped. -his
model measures customer perception to&ards t&o factors 6attributes performance and
shopping preference of customers6 and identifies the relationship of these t&o factors to
construct the quality perception of customers. -he results of this research re+eal that -&o6
factor model is more appropriate than %er+qual in recommending the attributes
impro+ement priorities.
*rimary data of the research is collected through t&o sur+eys. one is for supermar(et
customers in Ho Chi Minh City and one is for customers of Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh
Chieu. -he former is used to collect general perception about supermar(et quality
attributes and the latter is used to identify quality le+el of Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh
Chieu8s attributes. 5esponses from these t&o sur+eys are analy'ed by -&o6factor model to
deri+e characteristic cur+e of each attribute as &ell as current performance. contribution to
current shopping preference of customers. preference gap. and impro+ement efficiency of
each attribute of the store.
Based on the research findings. recommendations are made to impro+e the quality of the
store. ;uality attributes are classified into < main groups. -he first group includes
attributes &hich should be impro+ed. -he second group includes attributes &hich should be
impro+ed after all the attributes of the first group reach their potential. -he attributes of the
third group are recommended to be unchanged. Moreo+er. priorities for impro+ement of
attributes in each group are also specified. Among attributes &hich should be impro+ed.
quality of merchandise. agility of loc(er personnel. hospitality of personnel and +ariety of
product lines are four attributes &hich ha+e the highest priorities for impro+ement. -hey
are the (eys to impro+e quality of Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Ackn!"#$%#&#n'..................................................................................................................(
A)*'+,c'..................................................................................................................................((
T,)"# - Cn'#n'*.................................................................................................................(((
L(*' - F(%.+#*......................................................................................................................../
L(*' - T,)"#*........................................................................................................................./(
C0,1'#+ 2: In'+$.c'(n.......................................................................................................2
4.4 5ationale of -he 5esearch...........................................................................................4
4.2 *roblem %tatement.......................................................................................................4
4.< 5esearch =b>ecti+es.....................................................................................................2
4.? 5esearch #rame&or(....................................................................................................2
4.@ %cope of -he 5esearch.................................................................................................<
4.A =rgani'ation of -he 5esearch......................................................................................<
C0,1'#+ 3: C-1 M,+' In'+$.c'(n..................................................................................4
2.4 Bac(ground of %upermar(et.........................................................................................?
2.2 Co6op Mart 1ntroduction..............................................................................................A
C0,1'#+ 5: D#/#"1&#n' - T!--,c'+ M$#".................................................................25
<.4 5e+ie& of Multi6attribute Concept............................................................................4<
<.2 5e+ie& of %er+qual Model.........................................................................................4<
<.< 5e+ie& of ano Model..............................................................................................4@
<.? *roposed -&o6factor Model.......................................................................................4B
C0,1'#+ 4: R#*#,+c0 M#'0$"%6....................................................................................37
?.4 1nformation Needed....................................................................................................2@
?.2 -arget *opulations......................................................................................................2@
?.< ;uestionnaires De+elopment.....................................................................................2@
?.? %ampling *rocedure...................................................................................................2C
?.@ %ample Characteristics...............................................................................................2D
C0,1'#+ 7: F(n$(n%* An,"6*(* ,n$ D(*c.**(n...................................................................52
@.4 #acility Attributes Analysis........................................................................................<4
@.2 /oods Attributes Analysis..........................................................................................<?
@.< *ersonnel Attributes Analysis.....................................................................................<B
@.? *olicy Attributes Analysis..........................................................................................?2
@.@ -&o6factor Model +s. %er+qual..................................................................................?A
iii
C0,1'#+ 8: Cnc".*(n........................................................................................................49
A.4 *resent Customer *erception.....................................................................................?D
A.2 1mpro+ement %trategy................................................................................................?B
A.< -&o6factor Model.......................................................................................................@2
A11#n$(: A: Q.#*'(nn,(+# A............................................................................................75
A11#n$(: B: Q.#*'(nn,(+# B............................................................................................78
A11#n$(: C: In'#+/(#! Sc0#$."#.......................................................................................7;
A11#n$(: D: D,', An,"6*(*................................................................................................8<
A11#n$(: E: Q.,"('6 A''+().'#* - , S.1#+&,+k#'..........................................................=4
R#-#+#nc#*............................................................................................................................=8
i+
LIST OF FIGURES
#igure 4.4E 5esearch frame&or(............................................................................................2
#igure 2.4E *roportion of merchandises sold through supermar(et.......................................@
#igure 2.2E %aigon Co6op organi'ation chart.........................................................................C
#igure 2.<E =ld procurement procedure.................................................................................B
#igure 2.?E Ne& procurement procedure...............................................................................B
#igure 2.@E Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu =rgani'ation chart........................................43
#igure 2.AE Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu sales +olume !2333"......................................43
#igure <.4E -he ano diagram.............................................................................................4A
#igure <.2E -hree basic shapes of characteristic cur+e.........................................................23
#igure <.<E %tructure of characteristic cur+e........................................................................24
#igure <.?E -&o6factor model8s coefficients........................................................................2<
#igure ?.4E 5espondents8 age of sample A...........................................................................2D
#igure ?.2E 5espondents8 frequency of shopping in supermar(et of sample A....................2D
#igure ?.<E 5espondents8 a+erage spending for each shopping of sample A.......................2D
#igure ?.?E 5espondents8 age of sample B...........................................................................2B
#igure ?.@E 5espondents8 frequency of shopping in supermar(et of sample B....................2B
#igure ?.AE 5espondents8 a+erage spending for each shopping of sample B.......................2B
#igure @.4E Con+enience of par(ing.....................................................................................<2
#igure @.2E Air condition......................................................................................................<<
#igure @.<E %tore si'e............................................................................................................<<
#igure @.?E ;uality of merchandise......................................................................................<@
#igure @.@E )ariety of product lines. +ariety of brand names and +arieties for each product
line................................................................................................................................<A
#igure @.AE Con+enience of products arrangement for finding and attracti+eness of products
display..........................................................................................................................<C
#igure @.CE 1ntroduction of ne& products.............................................................................<D
#igure @.DE ,nique products &hich customers cannot find some&here else.......................<D
#igure @.BE Agility and hospitality of loc(er personnel........................................................?3
#igure @.43E Hospitality. expertise in product information. and helpfulness in finding of
salesperson...................................................................................................................?4
#igure @.44E Hospitality. accuracy. and agility of cashier....................................................?4
#igure @.42E *rice le+el compared &ith other supermar(ets................................................?<
#igure @.4<E 5eturning unqualified products policy............................................................??
#igure @.4?E Attracti+eness of promotion campaigns..........................................................??
#igure @.4@E #lexibility of paying method...........................................................................?@
#igure @.4AE Con+enience of open hours.............................................................................?A
#igure @.4CE Con+enience of open hours and quality of merchandise.................................?C
+
LIST OF TABLES
-able 2.4E Co6op Mart stores..................................................................................................D
-able 2.2E 7ist of Co6op Mart8s direct competitors..............................................................44
-able <.4E ano questionnaire combination table................................................................4C
-able ?.4E 7ist of studied attributes......................................................................................2A
-able ?.2E Attributes classification.......................................................................................2C
-able @.4E #acility attributes.................................................................................................<4
-able @.2E /oods attributes...................................................................................................<?
-able @.<E *ersonnel attributes.............................................................................................<B
-able @.?E *olicy attributes...................................................................................................?2
-able A.4E *resent customer perception................................................................................?D
-able A.2E 1mpro+ement priorities of the first group............................................................@4
-able A.<E 1mpro+ement priorities of the second group.......................................................@4
-able C.4E %chedule of sur+ey A..........................................................................................@B
-able C.2E %chedule of sur+ey B..........................................................................................@B
-able D.4E )ariables coding.................................................................................................A3
-able D.2E %hopping preference contributed by +ery good performance............................A4
-able D.<E %hopping preference contributed by +ery bad performance..............................A2
-able D.?E Current attributesF performance.........................................................................A<
-able D.@E %hopping preference contributed by current attributesF performance................A?
-able D.AE Difference bet&een current attributesF performance and +ery good performance
......................................................................................................................................A@
-able D.CE Difference bet&een current attributesF performance and +ery bad performanceAA
-able D.DE Difference bet&een shopping preference contributed by +ery good performance
and shopping preference contributed by current performance.....................................AC
-able D.BE Difference bet&een shopping preference contributed by current performance
and shopping preference contributed by +ery bad performance..................................AD
-able D.43E AttributesF characteristics..................................................................................AB
-able D.44E 7ist of attributes in the order of preference gap...............................................C4
-able D.42E 7ist of attributes in the order of impro+ement efficiency.................................C2
-able D.4<E *air test for difference in impro+ement efficiency...........................................C<
+i
CHAPTER 2: INTRODUCTION
2.2 RATIONALE OF THE RESEARCH
After more than 23 years of planned economy. )ietnam entered to the mar(et economy
&ith a lot of ne& (inds of business imported to the country. Among them. the concept of
supermar(et seems to be the one &hich has most impact on the lifestyle of )ietnamese.
$hile the (no&ledge of supermar(et quality recei+es many attentions from researchers in
other countries. the specific (no&ledge on )ietnam8s situation is scarce. %aigon Co6op
Mart is chosen for the research because it has the largest co+erage in Ho Chi Minh City.
the most dynamic city in )ietnam.
%aigon Co6op is a co6operati+e &hich used to operate in many businesses from
manufacturing to trading. exporting and retailing. 1n the recent years. it has a strategic
mo+e from a di+ersified portfolio in+estment to focusing on retailing especially the
supermar(et chain. Many business units &ere di+ested for freeing resources to de+elop the
supermar(et chain. #rom the beginning. Co6op Mart gains a significant mar(et share than(
to be one of the first mo+ers. Ho&e+er. it could not en>oy this ad+antage fore+er. 5ecently.
the competition on this (ind of business increases rapidly in term of quantity as &ell as
quality. Many supermar(ets ha+e been opened &ith modern facilities and larger area in the
last year. 1n the near future. the competition &ill be more intensi+e as the result of the
penetration of foreign supermar(et chain and the co6operation of other chains. #or
sustaining the mar(et leader position. %aigon Co6op must impro+e its competiti+eness and
the basic for this competiti+eness is quality. ;uality leads to customer satisfaction and
loyaltyG satisfied and loyal customers are a source of increasing future purchasing then the
firm long6term profitability and mar(et share !Anderson. #ornell. and 7ehmann. 4BB?".
=n the other hand. for capturing the mar(et quic(ly. %aigon Co6op Mart spreads its stores
all o+er the city &ith +ery high speed. As the result. the operation and quality le+el of the
stores are not unified. 1t creates a problem &ith customer perception of the brand.
Moreo+er. it ma(es the co6operation among stores ha+ing problems and the operation of
the &hole chain is not effecti+e. -o o+ercome these problems. the management of Co6op
Mart set up Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu as the model for their next generation stores.
After that. they standardi'e other stores based on this model.
-he result of this research &ill gi+e the company management a better understanding of the
relationship bet&een store8s performance and shopping preference of customers and also
the perception of customer about Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu. Consequently. they can
ha+e more precise and systematic decisions to impro+e the quality of Co6op Mart Nguyen
Dinh Chieu. -he result is not only the impro+ement of Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu but
also the impro+ement of the &hole chain &hen they apply this model to other stores.
2.3 PROBLEM STATEMENT
-he goal of this research is to pro+ide the management of %aigon Co6op a better insight of
Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu quality in the perception of customer in order to impro+e
its quality.
4
2.5 RESEARCH OB>ECTIVES
#or more detail to dri+e the research acti+ities. this goal could be bro(en do&n into a series
of ob>ecti+esE
De+eloping a ne& model to examine the quality of a ser+ice and set up priorities for
quality impro+ement based on the influences of performance impro+ement on
shopping preference of customers.
1dentifying the attributes of a supermar(et that affect percei+ed quality of customer
and finding out ho& these attributes8 performance influence the shopping preference
le+el of customers in an incremental manner.
Measuring customer8s perception about attributes performance of Co6op Mart
Nguyen Dinh Chieu and ho& much these attributes contribute to shopping
preference of customers.
*ro+iding recommendations to impro+e Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu8s quality in
an efficient &ayE impro+ing the right attributes in the right priorities based on the
incremental contribution of these attributes performance to shopping preference of
customers.
2.4 RESEARCH FRAMEWORK
Figure 1.1: Research framework
%tudied attributes
Attributes
characteristics
AttributesF
performance
Analysis
;uality attributes
Management
inter+ie&
*re+ious research
#ocus group of
customer
%ur+ey B %ur+ey A
%hopping preference
Management
inter+ie&
=bser+ation
5ecommendation
2
;uality attributes of a supermar(et are disco+ered through pre+ious research and focus
group of customers. -hen an inter+ie& &ith the company management to decide &hich
attributes &ill be studied. After that. t&o sur+eys &ill be conducted to collect primary data.
-he result of these t&o sur+eys &ill be used to characteri'e the attributes. =n the other
hand. the second sur+ey &ill be used to measure Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu8s
attributes performance and ho& much this performance le+el contributes to shopping
preference of customers. Based on these findings. some recommendations &ill be made to
help company management impro+e their store8s quality.
;uality attributes are characteri'ed. based on their impacts to shopping preference of
customers. -he concept underlies this method is t&ofold. #irstly. &hen an attribute is
impro+ed or declined. it does not affect shopping preference of customers by the same
amount. %econdly. this difference is not the same for e+ery attribute but each attribute has
its o&n property. %ome &ill ha+e more impact on increase side and others &ill ha+e more
impact on decrease side.
2.7 SCOPE OF THE RESEARCH
-he research excludes all other (inds of complementary businesses in the area of
supermar(et and focuses on supermar(et business !self6ser+ice area" only.
-he research focuses on three deli+ery processes of Co6op Mart &hich are belie+ed to be
main processes of a supermar(et. -hey are preparation for shopping. self6shopping. and
billing processes.
-he research does not ta(e into consideration the opinions of customers &ho +isit
supermar(et less than ? times in the year since they are assumed not to be familiar &ith
this (ind of shopping. 1n addition. customers &ho are under 4@ are also excluded.
2.8 ORGANI?ATION OF THE RESEARCH
Chapter 4!1ntroduction" pro+ides an introduction including the rationale of the research.
problem identification. ob>ecti+es. research frame&or(. scope of the research. and
organi'ation of the research report.
Chapter 2 !Co6op Mart introduction" presents the literatures of supermar(et bac(ground
and supermar(et in )iet Nam and introduces the de+elopment. organi'ation. and operation
of %aigon Co6op and the Co6op Mart chain. especially Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu
store.
Chapter < !De+elopment of -&o6factor model" pro+ides the literatures re+ie& of multi6
attribute concept and quality measurement. especially the %er+qual and ano models. -his
chapter also presents the de+elopment of -&o6factor model. &hich is to be used in this
research to examine ser+ice quality of Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu and set up priorities
for quality impro+ement.
Chapter ? !5esearch methodology" presents the information needed. target populations.
questionnaire de+elopment. sampling procedure. and sample characteristics of the research.
Chapter @ !#indings analysis and discussion" contains the discussion and analysis of
findings from customer sur+eys as &ell as management inter+ie& and obser+ation. %ome
recommendations are also discussed in this chapter.
Chapter A !Conclusion" dra&s out the conclusions for current percei+ed quality of %aigon
Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu. quality impro+ement strategy. and -&o6factor model.
<
CHAPTER 3: CO-OP MART INTRODUCTION
3.2 BACKGROUND OF SUPERMARKET
3.2.2 H(*'+6 ,n$ cnc#1' - *.1#+&,+k#'
-he supermar(et &as born in the ,% and &as one of the most interesting inno+ations
&hich has changed the retailing en+ironment. Exact place and time it &as born has been
debated for many years. According to *ea( H.%. !4BCC". most authors cite December D.
4B<2 as the birth date of the supermar(et &hen a ne& store called the Big Bear &as opened
in Ne& Hersey. -his store. along &ith other early supermar(ets. &as a child of the /reat
Depression. Economic conditions &ere such that the price &as all6important. and e+ery
penny counted.
-he lo&er price in supermar(ets is the result of lo&6margin operations that depend on +ery
high stoc( turno+er rates to sustain profits. =peration out of clean. modern facilities. the
supermar(et is basically a self6ser+ice operation supported by such ser+ices as par(ing.
chec( cashing. fast chec( out. and bagging. Cash and carry is the preferred method of
doing business !7e&ison. 4BB?".
-he supermar(et &as generally accepted as the food retailer until the years 4BC3s. By the
end of C3s. the changing lifestyle of the customers focused on con+enience had led some
operators to a 9one6stop6shopping6for6household6goods: supermar(et. -he emphasis on
one6stop shopping and the adding of ne& departments and sections has continued up till
no& !*ea(. 4BCC". -oday. a supermar(et8s upgraded and upscale operations include such
non6food lines as prescription medicines. electronic appliances. auto accessories. boo(s.
maga'ines. clothing. flo&ers. and house &are. Moreo+er. many supermar(ets ha+e added
numerous ser+ices including dry cleaning. postal. ban(ing. tailoring. medical. dental.
insurance. and legal ser+ices.
No one definition of a supermar(et exists because of the &ide range of business formula
used in this industry. -here are three criteria used to define a supermar(etE the minimum
si'e requirement. the characteristics and extent of self6ser+ice. and the stoc( requirements.
1n the ,%. a supermar(et &as firstly defined by the %upermar(et 1nstitute as a self6ser+ice
departmentali'ed food store ha+ing a minimum sales +olume of I2@3.333 per year. 1n
4B@?. the sales +olume &as re+ised to I@33.333 !Char+ar. 4BA4 and McCleland. 4BA<".
*rior to 4BD4. supermar(et included food stores &ith annual sales of at least I4 million.
5ecently. the minimum annual sales requirement is I2 million !7e&ison. 4BB?". 1n the ,.
a supermar(et is defined as a self6ser+ice food store &ith centrali'ed chec(outs and a sales
area of o+er 2.333 square feet !halifa =thman. 4BB3".
1n the ,%. supermar(ets. using D3J of retail food industry8s personnel. account for about
B3J of all retail food sales !*ea(. 4BCC". 1n the , and Canada. supermar(ets and large
superstores account for about D@J of grocery trade. %imilarly in other European countries.
supermar(ets dominate the food retailing system !halifa =thman. 4BB3".
3.2.3 S.1#+&,+k#' (n V(#' N,&
1n general. )ietnamese percei+es that the store offering self6ser+ice. ha+ing fixed price
labels and electronic chec(out as a 9supermar(et: !-hu Huong. 4BBC. p.<<". 1n her
research. -hu Huong !4BBC" reached the conclusion that most of the people !B?.BJ"
consider a store as a 9supermar(et: because of its self6ser+ice characteristic. &hich is
?
pretty ne& for )ietnamese shoppers. Many customers cite self6ser+ice as a positi+e side of
the store. because shoppers can en>oy free choice and comparison among brands. and can
a+oid the high pressure selling &hich is normal practice in other traditional stores. #ixed
pricing is also thought as a sign of a 9supermar(et: by nearly D@J of customers. More than
half of the customers point out that a 9supermar(et: should ha+e electronic chec(out. 1n
addition. nice and con+enience product displays are also considered as one attribute of a
9supermar(et: by ?3J of customers.
1n contrast &ith supermar(et concept used in de+eloped countries &hich is characteri'ed
by a large +olume. multi6line store that ser+es mass mar(et at competiti+e prices. the
supermar(ets in )iet Nam are more expensi+e than traditional outlets. and tend to cater the
middle and upper class customers. -he supermar(ets are still fairly basic in terms of
design. range and ser+ice. but they are a far cry from the small and congested roadside
stalls. Different &ith traditional mar(ets. supermar(ets ha+e &ell designed interior and
shopping comforts such as air conditioning. cold storage. and electronic chec(outs. -hey
offer self6ser+ice. high quality goods at fixed prices. -he merchandise mix is mainly
household amenities and personal care products. ready6to6eat foods. confectionary and
coo(ing materials. as &ell as foot&ear. clothing and some durable products !-hu Huong.
4BBC. p.?4".
According to -u /iang !4BBB". most of )ietnamese ha+e not been similar &ith shopping in
supermar(et. -here are CDJ of customers in Ho Chi Minh City and AAJ of customers in
Ha Noi &ho thought that the price in supermar(et is higher @J643J than that in other
outlets. %hopping frequency in supermar(et is +ery limited. 1n de+eloped countries. D3J of
customers go to supermar(et e+ery &ee(. -his number in )iet Nam is 42J in Ho Chi
Minh City and DJ in Ha Noi. As a result. proportion of sales +olume &hich is sole through
supermar(et is +ery lo&. >ust about @J of total retail +olume in )iet Nam.
Figure 2.1: Proportion of merchandises sold through supermarket
1
3
43
23
<3
?3
@3
A3
C3
D3
Hong(ong %ingapore orea Malaysia *hilippines )iet Nam
J
Ho&e+er. year 2334 begins a ne& era for supermar(et in )iet Nam. -he shopping area of
supermar(et is larger. the product lines and brands are more +aried. ser+ices are better. and
especially. the price &ill be cheaper due to fierce competition and efficient operation.
4
%ourceE AC Nielsen !4BBB".
@
Demand for supermar(et is more and more increasing. -he number of customers &ho go to
one supermar(et for shopping increases from hundreds per day to @ thousands per day in
a+erage. Especially. Mien Dong %upermar(et and Maximart recei+ed 23.333 customers per
day in opening days after off days for extent. 1n addition. the a+erage +alue of one bill
increases from @3.333)ND to 233.333)ND. -he number of abo+e 4 million )ND bill also
increases !Chanh hai. 2334". Moreo+er. the traffic condition in big cities of )iet Nam is
&orse and &orse. As a result. one6stop shopping &ill be preferred more and more because
customer &ill a+oid tra+eling from store to store for shopping. #or conclusion. the
de+elopment of supermar(et is the indispensable trend in big cities of )iet Nam.
3.3 CO-OP MART INTRODUCTION
3.3.2 S,(%n C-1
1n 4304BC@. Co6operati+e of $ard Cay %ung District C !recent name is -rading Co6
operati+e of $ard 4? District A" &as founded. 1t opened the mo+ement of co6operati+es in
Ho Chi Minh City. Many co6operati+es &ere founded in other districts. #or accelerating
the foundation and operation of co6operati+es. *ropaganda Board for Consumer Co6
operati+es and -rading Co6operati+es &as founded on 2303A04BCA. 1n 3?04BCD. the
*ropaganda Board &as renamed to Management Board of Consumer Co6operati+es and
-rading Co6operati+es. -he main function of Management Board &as to organi'e and
guide the operation of co6operati+es in Ho Chi Minh City.
#rom 4BDB. under the influence of social and economic reform process !Doi Moi". many
member co6operati+es &ere disintegrated. merged. or reformed because of the fierce
competition of other forms of business organi'ation. At that time. there &ere only C
member co6operati+es under the management of Management Board. -o reinforce the co6
operati+e segment. -he ,nion of -rading and %er+ice Co6operati+es of Ho Chi Minh City
!%aigon Co6op" &as founded in 3@04BDB based on resources of Management Board and
member co6operati+es.
5ecently. %aigon Co6op operates in many areas as follo&ingE
%upermar(etE Co6op Mart chain is the most &ell6(no&n supermar(et chain in Ho Chi
Minh City &ith A stores. 1t &ill be discussed more deeply in next sections.
Mini martE %aigon Co6op has >ust started to de+elop a mini mart system !mCo6op Mart"
in the form of >oint +entures &ith other local co6operati+es. ,p to no&. 2 stores &ere
opened in Ho Chi Minh CityG mCo6op Mart Cao -hang is a >oint +enture &ith $ards 26?6@
Co6operati+e and mCo6op Mart Cau inh is a >oint +enture &ith Cau inh Co6operati+e.
-hese stores supply daily necessities to customer such as food6grains. foodstuffs. health
care products. and family used items. etc. -he competiti+e ad+antage of this (ind of mart is
the con+enience for customer because the mart is located in residential area.
Distribution agent for other companiesE distributing and selling domestic products and
imported products all o+er the country.
ManufacturingE Nam Duong sauces &ith brand name 9Con Meo Den: &as elected as
)iet Nam high quality product during ? successi+e years from 4BBC to 2333. Nam Duong
sauces are distributed and sold all o+er the country and exported to European. American.
and 5ussian mar(ets.
ExportE agricultural products. aquatic products. seafoods. processed foods. textile.
garment. leather products. and handicraft.
A
1mportE ra& and &or(ing materials !such as plastic. textile. and chemical". foods.
machine. motorcycle. auto. and consumer8s goods.
%er+icesE besides tourism ser+ices of %aigon Co6op tourism center. %aigon Co6op also
pro+ides other ser+ices such as ad+ertisement. foreign exchange but not &ell de+eloped till
no&.
Dong hoi computer centerE trading computer. computer parts. maintenance. and
installing soft&are.
Figure 2.2: Saigon Co-op organization chart
C&&(''## - &#&)#+
c-1#+,'(/#*
B,+$ - &,n,%#&#n'
B,+$ - $(+#c'+*
In*1#c'(n *#c'(n
5KD
Domestic
business
Mar(eting
1mport0
export
Accounting Administrati+e
-echnical6
*ro>ect
Co6op Mart chain
Co6op Mart Cong ;uynh
Co6op Mart -ran Hung Dao
Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu
Co6op Mart Dinh -ien Hoang
Co6op Mart Dam%en
Co6op Mart Hau /iang
Distribution agent
for other companies
Nam Duong sauces
factory
%er+ices
Nhat Nam trading
center
mCo6op Mart chain
%aigon Co6op tourism center
Ad+ertisement ser+ices
#oreign exchange ser+ices
Ben -hanh trading
store
Dong hoi
computer store
Hoint6+entures
C
Ben -hanh trading storeE trading textile and garment &ith fixed price.
Nhat Nam trading centerE this is a >oint +enture of %aigon Co6op and Hasega&a
Company !Hapan". 1n addition to a supermar(et. it has many departments for rent.
Ho&e+er. the strategy for long6term de+elopment of %aigon Co6op is to de+elop the Co6op
Mart chain. 1t is the core business of %aigon Co6op in future.
3.3.3 T0# $#/#"1&#n' - C-1 M,+' c0,(n
1n 4BB<. some supermar(ets &ere established in Ho Chi Minh City such as Maxi Mart. Citi
Mart. etc. -hese e+ents created a ne& (ind of shopping beha+ior of customer in Ho Chi
Minh City. =perating in retailer segment. %aigon Co6op reali'ed the necessary of
de+elopment a supermar(et chain. 1t &as also the opportunity to de+elop and di+ersify the
operation.
Co6op Mart Cong ;uynh is the first store of Co6op Mart Chain. 1t &as founded on
3403A04BBA &ith operating area of C<2 m
2
and in+estment fund of A.@<3 billion )ND.
Based on the +ery good result of the first year. %aigon Co6op decided to de+elop the Co6op
Mart chain by founding some more stores after many carefully done mar(et researches.
5ecently. Co6op Mart Chain has A stores placed in Ho Chi Minh City. As the common
trend. the operating area of the store is increasing.
a!le 2.1: Co-op "art stores
2
%tore name Address #ounded
date
%hop6
Area
Co6op Mart Cong ;uynh 4DBc Cong ;uynh. dist. 4 3B03204BBA CA3 m
2
Co6op Mart -ran Hung Dao C2C -ran Hung Dao. dist. @ <303?04BBC 4233 m
2
Co6op Mart Hau /iang 4DD Hau /iang. dist. A 3@03404BBD 42C2 m
2
Co6op Mart Dam %en < Hoa Binh. dist. 44 4A04204BBD 23A3 m
2
Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh
Chieu
4AD Nguyen Dinh Chieu.
dist. <
<404204BBB 2A23 m
2
Co6op Mart Dinh -ien Hoang 42C Dinh -ien Hoang. dist.
Binh -hanh
2A03402333 2B<D m
2
-he +ision of Co6op Mart isE 9Co6op Mart is a trust&orthy shopping center for e+eryone
&ith high quality goods. reasonable price. and hospitable ser+ices:.
#or achie+ing the +ision abo+e. Co6op Mart started to implement follo&ing strategies and
mo+ementsE
+ %tandardi'ing the operation of the stores in Co6op Mart chain.
+ =pening ne& stores in many important areas in Ho Chi Minh City and other pro+inces.
+ Considering the mar(et price and implementing direct procurement from foreign and
domestic suppliers to establish a reasonable and competiti+e pricing policy.
2
%ourceE Ho Chi Minh City Commerce %er+ice. #ist of Supermarkets $ rading Centers in %o Chi "inh
Cit&. 3C02333.
D
+ Establishing the center &arehouse and distribution center. standardi'ing the
procurement procedures. and selecting suppliers to standardi'e product quality. price. and
product coding.
+ 1ncreasing promotion campaigns and ad+ertisement.
+ De+eloping 9hach Hang -han -hiet: program !friendly customer" to increase the
quantity and quality of loyal customer.
+ Computeri'ing all of the operation and management in Co6op Mart Chain.
+ %tandardi'ing the labor force and preparing the labor force for future de+elopment.
Figure 2.': (ld procurement procedure
Figure 2.): *ew procurement procedure
3.3.5 C-1 M,+' N%.6#n D(n0 C0(#.
As the result of the fast de+elopment. the operation of Co6op Mart stores &as different
from store to store. 5eali'ing the necessary of standardi'ation in supermar(et chain.
management of Co6op Mart is trying to construct a suitable model for supermar(et then
standardi'e the supermar(et chain based on this model. -herefore. they establish the ne&
store based on the experience of old stores and learning from other domestic and foreign
supermar(et then synchroni'e the &hole chain &ith the ne& store. Co6op Mart Nguyen
Dinh Chieu is the one.
=pened on <404204BBB &ith operating area of 2A23 m
2
. Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu is
the flagship of Co6op Mart chain. Applying the ne&est techniques. arrangement. and
procedures. Co6op Mart management attempt to position this store as a model for the next
1nformation
=rder <3J items
/oods
=rder C3J items
S.11"(#+*
D&#*'(c ).*(n#** $#1,+'&#n' C-1 M,+' *'+#*
S.11"(#+ 3
D(*'+().'(n C#n'#+
C-1 M,+' *'+# 2 C-1 M,+' *'+# 3 C-1 M,+' *'+# 5
S.11"(#+ 2 S.11"(#+ 5
B
generation of supermar(et in )iet Nam. 1n case of success. other Co6op Mart stores &ill be
reformed as this model.
Figure 2.+: Co-op "art *gu&en ,inh Chieu (rganization chart
D(+#c'+
%ecurity
super+isor
Mar(eting
staff
Cashier
super+isor
=ffice
super+isor
V(c#-$(+#c'+ -+ %+c#+(#* V(c#-$(+#c'+ -+ -$*
=perating
manager
=perating
manager
$arehouse
super+isor
%ales
super+isor
$arehouse
(eepers
%alespeople
$arehouse
super+isor
%ales
super+isor
$arehouse
(eepers
%alespeople
%ecurities
)ehicle
(eepers
Cashiers Administrator
Accountant
-reasurer
=ffice staffs
Figure 2.-: Co-op "art *gu&en ,inh Chieu sales .olume /20001
'
3
@
43
4@
23
2@
<3
<@
?3
;1 ;11 ;111 ;1)
b
i
l
l
i
o
n

)
N
D
After one year of operation. the performance of Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu &as quite
good. -he sales +olume per m
2
of Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu &as higher than other
stores in the chain !except Co6op Mart Cong ;uynh. the first store of Co6op Mart". After
the intensi+e promotion campaigns &hen opening and the pea( shopping season of -et
!7unar Ne& Lear" in the first quarter. the sales +olume &as increasing from the second
quarter to the last quarter of year 2333 dramatically.
<
4,%D M 4?@33)ND !3<02334"
43
3.3.4 C&1#'('(n
-he competitors of Co6op Mart chain are other supermar(ets and other (inds of retailer
such as traditional mar(et and grocery. Ho&e+er. supermar(et has some special
characteristics &hich are different from others. for example. fixed price. self6ser+ice.
highly merchandise concentration. cleanliness. etc. -herefore. the direct competitors of Co6
op Mart are other supermar(ets.
a!le 2.2: #ist of Co-op "art2s direct competitors
%tore name Address %hop6Area
!m
2
"
No. of
items
Cora Dong Nai 44C?*4 7ong Binh -an.
Bien Hoa. Dong Nai
23.333 23.333
Cora An 7ac <@? Hung )uong. dist. Binh
Chanh
,nder
construction
N0A
Maximart 7e 7oi A@ 7e 7oi. dist.4 2.C<? 22.333
Maximart <02 <C <02. dist. 43 42.333 22.333
Citimart 2462< Nguyen -hi Minh hai.
dist.4
233 43.333
Citimart Minh Chau <AB 7e )an %y. dist. < 2.B33 43.333
Citimart <B 7e Duan. dist.4 <.333 23.333
Minimart B@6434 Nam y hoi Nghia.
dist. 4
A33 43.333
Minimart %uperbo&l A?< -ruong %on. dist. -an
Binh
D<@ 4@.333
1nternational -rading Center B@6434 Nam y hoi Nghia.
dist. 4
4?.DCA 4@.333
-huong Na -ax 4<@ Nguyen Hue. dist.4 C.@33 23.@@4
*acific Mart DB <02. dist.43 C@3 24.??3
#oodcomart 4 <02. dist. 43 4.<@A 4@.333
-enmart 2CCB Cach Mang -hang -am.
dist.43
2.333 4@.333
Mien Dong %upermar(et 232B Hoang )an -hu D.333 43.333
Ha Noi %upermar(et 4DB Cong ;uynh. dist.4 4.333 23.333
1n Ho Chi Minh City !and Cora Dong Nai in Bien Hoa". there are 4A supermar(ets of 44
supermar(et chains !excluding Co6op Mart" ha+e considerable scale. Among them. there
are three redoubtable competitorsE Cora !Bourbon". Maximart. and Mien Dong
%upermar(et. All of the three ha+e considerable larger operating area than Co6op Mart
stores.
CoraE Bourbon Corporation !#rance". Although Cora Dong Nai is the only operating
supermar(et. Cora &ill de+elop fast &ith Cora An 7ac and another one in district 43 are in
construction. $ith a strong financial fund and the support from Bourbon Corporation. they
44
can spend a lot of money in mar(eting. promotion campaigns and lo&er the price to gain
more mar(et share. 1n addition. the experience in supermar(et business and good
management s(ills help them operate more efficient and professional.
MaximartE there are many product lines and +arieties as &ell as brand names.
especially in imported products. =ther strengths of Maximart are good management s(ills
and lo& tax.
Mien Dong %upermar(etE the operating area is large and ha+ing ability to extent. -here
are many product lines and +arieties as &ell as brand names. -he price is lo&er than other
supermar(et.
1n addition. there is the threat of merger of other supermar(et into a bigger supermar(et
chain. Especially. the intention of the co6operation and might be merger of Maximart.
Citimart. and Mien Dong %upermar(et into the biggest supermar(et chain in Ho Chi Minh
City.
#or sur+i+al and de+elopment in such a fierce competiti+e en+ironment. Co6op Mart
positions itself as the most co+erage supermar(et chain &ith standardi'ed ser+ice and price
by establishing many supermar(ets &ith a+erage operating area co+er a large region. -he
first step of standardi'ation is to establish the flagship store then synchroni'e the &hole
chain. Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu is to be the one.
42
CHAPTER 5: DEVELOPMENT OF TWO-FACTOR MODEL
1n this research. a ne& model is de+eloped to examine ser+ice quality of Co6op Mart
Nguyen Dinh Chieu and set up priorities for quality impro+ement. Although many
textboo(s introduce %er+qual as a prefer model to measure ser+ice quality. it faces a lot of
criticisms from literature as &ell as empirical testing. 1n addition. its managerial
implication is also challenged. -herefore. based on the ideas of the relationship of t&o
quality constructed components and incremental effect of ano model. an alternati+e
model is designed. As %er+qual and ano models. this model is also a multi6attribute
model. &hich pro+ides more insight to managers and researchers than an o+erall effect
model. Before de+eloping the ne& model. multi6attribute concept. %er+qual model. and
ano model are re+ie&ed.
5.2 REVIEW OF MULTI-ATTRIBUTE CONCEPT
According to $il(ie and *essemier !4BC<". in multi6attribute models. a ser+ice !or product"
is +ie&ed as a bundle of benefits and costs. -he potential ad+antage of multi6attribute
models o+er the simpler 9o+erall effect: approach is that yields understanding and feasible
impro+ement direction. A model &hich cannot help analysts gain these things is prone to
be theoretically +acuous. Attributes pro+ide the basic dimensionality of the model.
Ho&e+er. the &ea(ness of the construct in this model is that attributes are perceptual rather
than ob>ecti+e product construct. that reasonable candidate lists can be generated by
combining unstructured inter+ie&s. Each attribute has t&o measures. importance &eight
and belief rating. Both of them are presumed to add explanatory po&erG belief rating
contribute product differences &hile importance &eight pro+ide differential stress on
attributes.
#or applying this (ind of models. a ser+ice !or product" &ill be di+ided into many
attributes. Based on customer perception about each attribute. the measurement &ill be
conducted. By doing that &ay. researcher could understand deeper the construct of quality
then (no& ho& to impro+e the quality perception of customer by impro+ing each attribute
performance.
Many multi6attribute models &ere designed to measure ser+ice quality up to this time such
as %er+qual !*arasuraman. Oeithaml. and Berry. 4BD@. 4BDD. 4BB4". %er+perf !Cronin and
-aylor. 4BB2". E+aluated performance !E*" model and Normed quality model !-eas. 4BB<".
Among them. %er+qual is the most &ell (no&n one in textboo(s. 1n addition. ano quality
model is also a multi6attribute model e+en though it is a quality identification model rather
than a quality measurement model. -he next sections &ill present %er+qual and ano
models as the bases to de+elop -&o6factor model.
5.3 REVIEW OF SERVQUAL MODEL
5.3.2 Q.,"('6 $#-(n('(n
-he concept of %er+qual model is generally based on gap theory of *arasuraman. Oeithaml.
and Berry !4BD@". &hich suggests that 9the difference bet&een customers8 assessment of
the actual performance of a specific firm &ithin a general class of ser+ice pro+iders and
their expectation about the performance of that class !*6E gap" dri+es the perception of
ser+ice quality.:
4<
5.3.3 S#+/@.," $(&#n*(n*
According to its de+elopers. %er+qual instrument consists of 22 attributes &hich can be
classified into @ dimensionsE tangible. reliability. responsi+eness. assurance. and empathy
!*arasuraman. Berry. and Oeithaml. 4BDD".
-angibility dimensionE because of the absence of a physical product. customers often
rely on the tangible e+idence that surrounds the ser+ice in forming e+aluation. -his
dimension includes +ariety of ob>ects such as des(s. lightning. &all color. brochures.
appearance of firm8s personnel. etc.
5eliability dimensionE reflects the consistency and dependability of a firm8s
performance. Does the firm pro+ide the same le+el of ser+ice time after time. or does
quality dramatically +ary &ith each encounterP Does the firm (eep its promises. bill its
customers accurately. (eep accurate records. and perform the ser+ice correctly the first
timeP
5esponsi+eness dimensionE reflects the commitment of a firm to pro+ide its ser+ice in a
timely manner. -his dimension concerns the &illingness and readiness of personnel to
pro+ide a ser+ice. 1t reflects the preparedness of the firm to pro+ide the ser+ice.
Assurance dimensionE addresses the competence of a firm. the courtesy it extends to its
customers. and the security of the ser+ice. -his dimension refers to ho& a firm8s personnel
interact &ith customers and customers8 possession such as courtesy reflects politeness.
friendliness. and consideration for the customers8 property.
Empathy dimensionE is ability of the firm8s personnel to experience customers8 feeling
as their o&n. Empathic firms understand their customer needs and ma(e their ser+ice
accessible to customers.
5.3.5 S#+/@.," @.#*'(nn,(+#
%er+qual questionnaire includes 22 pairs of question designed to capture the perception of
customer about their expectation to&ard 22 attributes of a ser+ice and their percei+ed
performance of these attributes. -hese pairs of question ha+e the same format according to
*arasuraman. Berry. and Oeithaml !4BB4"E
ExpectationE Excellent company &ill ha+e 9attribute 4: !attribute 2. <. ... 22".
*erformanceE NLO company has 9attribute 4: !attribute 2. <. ... 22".
5.3.4 M,n,%#+(," (&1"(c,'(n
-he bigger the gap bet&een attribute performance and customer expectation of the attribute
is. the lo&er the quality is. -herefore. there is more impro+ement needed for this attribute
rather than others. As a result. the priorities for impro+ement are associated &ith the
magnitude of *6E gaps. -he larger the *6E gap is. the more benefits can be gained by
closing the gap and the higher priority to impro+e the attribute has.
5.3.7 C+('(@.#* -+ S#+/@.," &$#"
a) Reliability and dimensionality of 5-dimension structure
-he reliability tests of Cronin and -aylor !4BB2" in four industries !ban(s. pest control. dry
cleaning. and fast food" pro+e that the @6dimension structure of %er+qual is not confirmed
in any of research samples. -he chi square statistic uni+ersally indicates a poor fit bet&een
4?
the theoretical and measurement model for @6dimension structure. -he ad>usted goodness6
of6fit indices are also not indicati+e of a good fit. 1n addition. the dimensional test indicates
that 22 attributes are unidimensional or they are considered as one composite of indi+idual
measures.
#rom the testing results abo+e. Cronin and -aylor suggest that the dimensional structure of
quality measures and quality attributes should be constructed flexibly according to specific
industry. #i+e6dimension structure of %er+qual has a conceptual meaning rather than a
frame&or( to design a practical research.
b) Validity of Servqual measures
-he primary threat to +alidity of %er+qual measures is construct +alidity. Carmines and
Oeller !4BCB. p.2<" state. 9fundamentally. construct +alidity is concerned &ith the extent to
&hich a particular measure relates to other measures consistent &ith theoretically deri+ed
hypotheses concerning the concepts !or constructs" that are being measure:. -he +alidity
test of Cronin and -aylor !4BB2" suggests that the performance6based measures pro+ide a
more construct6+alid explication of ser+ice quality than %er+qual measures because of their
content +alidity. 1n addition. the findings of enneth -eas8 empirical test !4BB<" pro+e that
e+aluated performance measurement frame&or( is characteri'ed by higher +alidity than *6
E frame&or(.
Hence. the attributes performance is measured in this research rather than the *6E gaps.
c) Priorities for improvement
-he managerial implication of %er+qual model implies that the impro+ement of an attribute
&hich has bigger *6E gap &ill pro+ide more benefits than impro+ement of an attribute
&hich has smaller *6E gap so the former has higher priority to impro+e. -he results of this
research &ill pro+e that this implication is not al&ays +alid. 1n case of some attributes. the
impro+ement is not &orth e+en though the performance gap is large.
5.5 REVIEW OF KANO MODEL
5.5.2 Q.,"('6 $#-(n('(n
1n H1% !Hapanese 1ndustrial %tandards" OD434. quality is defined as 9the totality of quality
characteristics. or le+el of performance. that determines &hether a product or ser+ice
satisfies the purpose of use: !ano. 4BBA. p.44?".
;uality concept is di+ided into 2 components. performance and satisfaction. Ha+ing more
meaning than quality definition in %er+qual. this definition does not stop at performance
measure !performance is not a benefits related factor" but it goes further. this performance
must contribute to customer satisfaction in order to be defined as quality. -his definition
lin(s quality concept &ith customer benefits.
5.5.3 K,n $(,%+,&
1t is clear that companies should pro+ide ser+ice !or product" &ith high quality and it is
easy to understand that higher ser+ice !or product" performance can result in higher
customer satisfaction. Ho&e+er. the relationship bet&een customer satisfaction and ser+ice
!or product" performance is more complicated than this. #or some attributes. customer
satisfaction can be greatly impro+ed only &ith a small impro+ement of performanceG
&hile. for some other attributes. customer satisfaction can only be impro+ed a little e+en
&hen the performance of the ser+ice !or product" has been greatly impro+ed. -hus. the
4@
deep understanding of this relationship is the prerequisite to achie+ing customer
satisfaction.
#or the abo+e purpose. ano ha+e de+eloped a +ery useful diagram to characterise
customer needs. -his diagram is a tool in the field of 5KD for de+elopment ne& products
and ser+ices. especially in the integration &ith ;uality #unction Deployment !;#D" !%hen.
-an. and Nie. 2333". 1t de+ides ser+ice !or product" features into three distinct categories.
each of them affects customer satisfaction in a +ery different &ayE
Must6be attributesE customer ta(e them for granted &hen fulfilled. Ho&e+er. if the
ser+ice !or product" does not meet this basic need sufficiently. the customer may become
+ery dissatisfied.
=ne6dimensional attributesE these attributes result in customer satisfaction &hen
fulfilled and dissatisfied &hen not fulfilled. -he better the attributes are. the better the
customer li(e them.
Attracti+e attributesE the absence of attracti+e attributes does not cause dissatisfaction
because they are not expected by customers &ho may be una&are of such ser+ice !or
product" features. Ho&e+er. strong achie+ement in these attributes delights customer.
Figure '.1: he 3ano diagram
1n addition to three main categories abo+e. ano introduced t&o more categories !ano.
4BBA. p.4<3" to co+er all posible attributesE
1ndifference attributesE an increase or decrease in performance le+el does not ma(e any
difference. Ho&e+er. it is +ery hard to ha+e an absolute indifference attribute. ,sually. an
attribute has some effects. more or less. on some customer.
Ad+erse attributesE an increase in performance le+el results in customer disatisfaction.
and a decrease results in satisfaction. -hese attributes are nothing than the oppositions to
three main categories.
S,'(*-,c'(n
Must6be
Attracti+e
=ne6dimensional
P#+-+&,nc#
4A
-o conclude. in ano model. the measurements of performance le+el and customer
satisfaction are distinct. Moreo+er. the relationship of these t&o measurements is not
al&ays linear but may be con+ex.
5.5.5 K,n @.#*'(nn,(+#
ano de+ised a questionnaire !5ao. Carr. Dambolena. opp. Martin. 5afii. and
%chlesinger. 4BBA. p.?336?34" that helps categori'e the different attributes by using pairs of
opposite questions. each &ith fi+e possible responses. #or example. an attribute about
a+ailability of brand choice in supermar(et may be questioned asE
1f there are many brands for one product in the supermar(et. ho& do you feelP
4. 1 li(e it that &ay
2. 1t must be that &ay
<. 1 am neutral
?. 1 can li+e &ith it that &ay
@. 1 disli(e it
1f there is only one brand for one product in the supermar(et. ho& do you feelP
4. 1 li(e it that &ay
2. 1t must be that &ay
<. 1 am neutral
?. 1 can li+e &ith it that &ay
@. 1 disli(e it
1n this (ind of questionnaire. one question deals &ith the attribute in a positi+e manner. and
the t&in deals &ith negati+e manner. -he responses are compiled to categori'e the
attributes as follo&ing tableE
a!le '.1: 3ano 4uestionnaire com!ination ta!le
Negati+e
4 2 < ? @
*
o
s
i
t
i
+
e
4 ; A A A =
2 5 1 1 1 M
< 5 1 1 1 M
? 5 1 1 1 M
@ 5 5 5 5 ;
Ma>ority of the responses for a specific pair are in cellE
+ 9A:E attracti+e attribute.
+ 9=:E one6dimensional attribute.
+ 9M:E must6be attribute.
+ 91:E indifference attribute.
+ 95:E ad+erse attribute.
+ 9;:E some customers &ould li(e the attribute to be present and also not to be present.
-his probably indicates that the item for the response &as improperly formulated.
4C
5.5.4 M,n,%#+(," (&1"(c,'(n
-he priorities for impro+ement should be from must6be attributes to one6dimensional
attributes then attracti+e attributes at last !5ao. Carr. Dambolena. opp. Martin. 5afii.
%chlesinger. 4BBA. p.?32". 1n addition. there are some more specific managerial
implicationsE
#or must6be attributesE they must reach the threshold &here the impro+ement of
performance does not gain any increase in customer satisfaction or the increase is not
considerable. Ho&e+er. if they do not reach this threshold. the customer &ill terribly
dissatisfy.
#or one6dimensional attributesE the more &e can impro+e them. the better the customer
satisfaction.
#or attracti+e attributesE a little impro+ement of these attributes might increase the
customer satisfaction dramatically but the absence of them &ill not be recogni'ed by
customer.
5.5.7 C+('(@.#* -+ K,n &$#"
a) Qualitative vs. quantitative analysis
-he measurement in ano model is qualitati+e rather than quantitati+e. 1t is used to
classify quality attributes into fi+e categories but it cannot distinguish quality attributes
&ithin each categories. -herefore. all of attributes in one category are treated identically.
As a result. the analyst cannot ma(e the specific recommendation for each attribute.
Moreo+er. the difference among attributes &ithin one category may be +ery significant. #or
instance. in one6dimensional category. the steeper the attribute. the more meaningful to
impro+e the attribute. 1n ano model. all one6dimensional attributes are the same and the
steepness of attribute is ignored. %imilarity to other categories. the steepness and the
con+exity of attributes are ignored in each category.
b) Too much indifference attributes
A large proportion of attributes might fall into indifference category due to the large
number of indifference cells in the ano questionnaire combination table !B02@". 1t leads
the analyst to ignore many attributes. 1n fact. an absolute indifference attribute is scarce.
An attribute usually has more or less impact into the perception of the customer. -he
attribute &hich is called indifference is the one that has less impact than others. -he &ider
the range of indifference attributes in the model. the bigger the chance to ignore a
meaningful attribute. 1n addition. the central tendency bias in responses ma(es this
problem more seriously.
c) Quality identification vs. quality measurement
-he ano model is used to identify the quality perception of customer about a ser+ice !or
product". not to measure the quality of this ser+ice !or product". 1n the model. quality
attributes are classified into different categories but perception of customer about quality
le+el of a specific ser+ice !or product" is not measured. -his is the reason &hy ano model
has not been used in pre+ious quality measurement research. 1n fact. this model is used
&idely in ser+ice !or product" de+elopment in &hich the ser+ice8s !or product8s" attributes
are designed according to their categories.
Ho&e+er. the ideas of measuring the relationship bet&een product performance le+el and
customer satisfaction and incremental affect concept in ano model are +ery interesting.
4D
-he next section &ill be dedicated for de+eloping the model &hich is to be used in this
research.
5.4 PROPOSED TWO-FACTOR MODEL
1n this section. a ne& model is de+eloped to examine a ser+ice quality and set up priorities
for quality impro+ement. -his model. called 9-&o6factor model:. &ill o+ercome some
shortcoming of %er+qual and ano models as follo&ing discussion.
=n one hand. %er+qual model faces &ith some critical problems as discussion in the
second section of this chapterE
+ #irstly. the @6dimension structure of attributes is not reliable and the dimensional
property of this structure is also &ea( !Cronin and -aylor. 4BB2". =ther quality
measurement models such as %er+perf model. E+aluated performance model. and
Normed quality model also face this problem due to using the same dimensional
structure. Hence. it is not necessary to apply this structure into quality measurement
model. ,sing the inter+ie& or focus group to explore quality attributes of a specific
product or ser+ice as in the basic of multi6attribute models !$il(ie and *essemier. 4BC<"
may be a flexible alternati+e in &hich the characteristics of a product or ser+ice are
reflected more specifically.
+ %econdly. using *6E gap to measure quality is &orse than using performance in
+alidity tests !Cronin and -aylor. 4BB2. and -eas. 4BB<". 1t is suggested that the ne&
model should be a performance measurement base rather than *6E gap measurement
base.
+ -hirdly. the implication of using *6E gap to determine priorities to impro+e is
challenged. 1t is necessary to add one more component in the model to ma(e sure that
the impro+ement of performance &ill cause the impro+ement of firm benefit.
=n the other hand. ano model is not a quality measurement model but it is a
qualitati+e model to determine the relationship of attribute performance and customer
satisfaction in an incremental manner. Ho&e+er. this idea opens a ne& approach to
measure quality &hich o+ercomes the third &ea(ness of %er+qual.
1n conclusion. a ne& model is proposed to o+ercome the &ea(nesses of %er+qual. Based on
the concept of the relationship of t&o quality constructed components in an incremental
manner of ano model. -&o6factor model is designed as a performance base quantitati+e
model to examine quality by measuring attributes performance and a firm8s benefit related
factor and it also determines the relationship bet&een them. Moreo+er. it could be used to
set up the priorities for quality impro+ement.
5.4.2 E:#c.'(/# @.,"('6 $#-(n('(n
-he proposed -&o6factor model is based on the similar quality definition of H1% !Hapanese
1ndustrial %tandards" OD434 as ano model because it is also constructed by t&o quality
components. Ho&e+er. for practical purpose. this definition is some&hat modified.
%atisfying the purpose of use is conceptually a customer benefit. 1t is easy to agree that
customer satisfaction has positi+e relationships &ith customer loyalty. purchase intention.
and shopping preference. &hich are the benefits of the firm !Anderson. #ornell. and
7ehmann. 4BB?" but 9ho& strong are these relationshipsP: is a difficult question to ans&er.
#or associating quality concept directly &ith the firm benefits to bypass the question
abo+e. &e should go further by replacing satisfaction factor &ith one of the firm8s benefit
4B
related factors. shopping preference. -herefore. the quality definition is modified asE 9the
totality of quality characteristics. or le+el of performance. that determines the shopping
preference of customers to&ard a product or ser+ice:.
Besides. using this executi+e definition could gain more interest of managers. &ho are
interested in the firm benefits. to impro+e quality. -he reason is that quality impro+ement
has direct effect on shopping preference of customers to&ard their product or ser+ice.
According to the definition abo+e. quality is constructed by the totality of product or
ser+ice8s attributes performance &hich contributes to shopping preference of customers.
-herefore. a model for quality examination must satisfy four requirementsE
-otal measuring.
Measuring the performance le+el !the first factor".
Measuring the shopping preference of customers contributed by this performance le+el
!the second factor".
1dentifying the relationship bet&een t&o factors abo+e.
-o ensure that total quality characteristics are measured. -&o6factor model must be a
multi6attribute model. 1dea of relationship of t&o factors in an incremental manner from
ano model is used to found the model. 1nstead of the relationship of attribute
performance and customer satisfaction as in ano model. the relationship in -&o6factor
model is of attribute performance and shopping preference of customers. Ne+ertheless. the
concept of the relationship is the same. #or some attributes. shopping preference of
customers can be greatly impro+ed only &ith a small impro+ement of performanceG &hile.
for some other attributes. shopping preference of customers can only be impro+ed a little
e+en &hen the performance of the ser+ice or product has been greatly impro+ed. 1n
addition. this relationship is not al&ays linear but can be con+ex.
Based on the quality concept in this section. an analytical frame&or( is de+eloped in
follo&ing sections.
5.4.3 C0,+,c'#+(*'(c c.+/# ,n$ &,n,%#+(," (&1"(c,'(n
Figure '.2: hree !asic shapes of characteristic cur.e
S011(n%
1+#-#+#nc#
7inear
Negati+e con+ex
*ositi+e con+ex
P#+-+&,nc#
23
1n -&o6factor model. each attribute is presented as a cur+e called 9characteristic cur+e: in
t&o6dimensional co6ordinates. -he hori'ontal axis represents performance le+el of an
attribute and the +ertical axis represents the shopping preference of customers contributed
by this performance le+el. -he characteristic cur+e has three basic shapesE negati+e con+ex
cur+e. straight line !linear". and positi+e con+ex cur+e. 1n order to determine the shape of
the cur+e. three points are needed. 1nformation of these three points comes from t&o
sur+eysE
%ur+ey A is used to measure shopping preference contributed by +ery good
performance and by +ery bad performance of each attribute. #or this purpose. the
questionnaire of this sur+ey consists of pairs of one extremely positi+e question and one
extremely negati+e question.
%ur+ey B is used to measure performance le+el of each attribute of studied product or
ser+ice and shopping preference contributed by this performance le+el. -he questionnaire
of this sur+ey is constructed of t&o sets of questions. one for performance le+el and one for
shopping preference contributed by this performance le+el.
#rom the response of sur+ey A. t&o extreme points are determined. Hori'ontal coordinates
of these t&o points are +ery good !positi+e point" and +ery bad !negati+e point"
performance le+el of an attribute and +ertical coordinates are respecti+e shopping
preference of customers contributed by these performance le+els. -he third point !current
point" comes from the response of sur+ey B. 1ts coordinates are performance le+el of
studied product or ser+ice in an attribute and shopping preference of customers contributed
by this performance le+el.
Figure '.': Structure of characteristic cur.e
Characteristics of an attribute could be deri+ed from characteristic cur+e as follo&ingE
-he more linear the cur+e is. the more symmetrically the attribute performance affects
shopping preference of customers. -his (ind of attribute is called 9linear attribute:.
-he more positi+e con+ex the cur+e is. the more significantly the attribute performance
affects shopping preference of customers on the decreasing direction than that on the
increasing direction. -his (ind of attribute is called 9positi+e con+ex attribute:.
S011(n%
1+#-#+#nc#
Current point
Negati+e point
*ositi+e point
P#+-+&,nc#
24
-he more negati+e con+ex the cur+e is. the more significantly the attribute
performance affects shopping preference of customers on the increasing direction than
that on the decreasing direction. -his (ind of attribute is called 9negati+e con+ex
attribute:.
-he steeper !positi+e or negati+e" the cur+e is. the more shopping preference is
sensiti+e !positi+e or negati+e" to performance impro+ement.
-he higher the cur+e is. the more it contributes to shopping preference of customers.
-he current point represents the current situation of studied ser+ice !or product" at each
attribute. 1ts hori'ontal coordinate indicates the current percei+ed performance of this
attribute and its +ertical coordinate indicates the shopping preference of customers
contributed by this le+el of performance. -he negati+e point represents the &orst case of an
attribute &hen its performance is +ery bad. 1n contrast. the positi+e point represents the
best case of an attribute &hen its performance is +ery good.
Based on the relati+e position of current point compared &ith positi+e point on the
characteristic cur+e and the shape of characteristic cur+e. &e can ans&er the question 9ho&
&ould &e gain in shopping preference of customers if a specific attribute performance is to
be impro+edP: 1n general. the attribute &hich has steepest angular co6efficient at current
point &ill be in the first priority for impro+ement because shopping preference of
customers is most sensiti+e &ith this attribute.
%imilarly. the relati+e position of current point compared &ith negati+e point and the shape
of the characteristic cur+e indicates that 9ho& &ould &e lose in shopping preference of
customer if a specific attribute performance is to be decreasedP:
#or conclusion. characteristic cur+e determines the relationship bet&een shopping
preference of customers and a specific attribute performance in an incremental manner.
-ogether &ith current point. negati+e point. and positi+e point. the shape of characteristic
cur+e unco+ers the beha+ior of shopping preference of customers if a specific attribute
performance increases or decreases from current performance.
5.4.5 T!--,c'+ &$#"A* c#--(c(#n'* ,n$ &,n,%#+(," (&1"(c,'(n
1n addition to graphical e+aluation. there are t&o measures &hich indicate the priorities for
impro+ementE
#irstly. preference gap !difference bet&een shopping preference le+el contributed by
+ery good performance and shopping preference le+el contributed by current performance"
of an attribute is used to measure the potential for shopping preference impro+ement &hich
can be achie+ed by impro+ing the attribute performance. -he larger the preference gap is.
the more benefits the firm can gain in term of shopping preference of customer to&ard its
product or ser+ice by impro+ing the attribute performance.
e performanc current e performanc good .er&
preference shopping preference shopping gap Preference =
%econdly. impro+ement efficiency !preference gap di+ided by performance gap Qthe
difference bet&een +ery good performance and current performance" of an attribute is used
to measure the efficiency of shopping preference impro+ement by impro+ing attribute
performance. 1t is the a+erage angular co6efficient of characteristic cur+e from current
point to positi+e point. Hence. it indicates the impro+ement priorities of attributes
performance. -he higher the impro+ement efficiency is. the more shopping preference
amount the firm gains by impro+ing a certain amount of attribute performance.
22
gap e Performanc
gap Preference
efficienc& t 5mpro.emen =
Figure '.): wo-factor model2s coefficients
As a result. the higher the impro+ement efficiency is. the higher the priority for
performance impro+ement the attribute has. Moreo+er. attributes &hich ha+e lo&
impro+ement efficiency but high preference gap are the reser+e sources for impro+ement
in term of shopping preference &hen all of high efficient attributes reach their potential so
the firm cannot gain any amount of shopping preference of customer by impro+ing them.
Ho&e+er. the efforts and resources needed for performance impro+ement +ary from
attribute to attribute. #or some attributes. it is +ery easy and cheap to impro+e the
performance. 1n contrast. it is +ery difficult and expensi+e to impro+e some attributes
performance. #or detailed impro+ement program. this factor must be considered and an
action plan &ith cost0benefit analysis should be conducted. -his research model focuses
mostly on benefit side !shopping preference of customers".
5.4.4 C+('(@.#* -+ T!--,c'+ &$#"
a) The determination of characteristic curve
By using three points in t&o dimensions co6ordinates as the method described abo+e to
construct characteristic cur+e. the shape of characteristic cur+e is determined rather than
the exact cur+e. Ho&e+er. it is good enough for the analysis in this research because the
needed information is the shape of characteristic cur+e and three critical pointsE negati+e
point. current point. and positi+e point.
b) The accuracy of improvement efficiency
-he impro+ement efficiency is the a+erage angular coefficient of characteristic cur+e from
current point to positi+e point. -herefore. it does not determine exactly the efficiency of
performance impro+ement at current point but it determines the a+erage efficiency of
1mpro+ement
efficiency
P#+-+&,nc#
*erformance gap
*reference gap
S011(n%
1+#-#+#nc#
Current point
*ositi+e point
2<
performance impro+ement from current performance to +ery good performance. 1f the
attribute performance does not impro+e thoroughly to +ery good performance. this
coefficient &ill be less accurate. 1n addition. the more con+ex the cur+e is !from current
point to positi+e point". the less accurate the impro+ement efficiency is because the
con+exity leads to the +ariety of angular coefficient from current point to positi+e point. 1f
the characteristic cur+e is degenerated to be a straight line. impro+ement efficiency &ill be
absolutely accurate.
#or conclusion. impro+ement efficiency is an accurate coefficient &hen the attribute
performance impro+es thoroughly to +ery good performance or &hen the con+exity is not
so significant. =ther&ise it should be considered as an approximate coefficient.
c) The need of to surveys
-&o sur+eys are needed for data analysis. %ur+ey A is used to measure shopping preference
contributed by +ery good performance and by +ery bad performance of each attribute and
sur+ey B is used to measure performance le+el of each attribute of studied product or
ser+ice and shopping preference contributed by this performance le+el. 1t is the price for
the quality and quantity of information. Ho&e+er. sur+ey A could be reused for other
research of the same (ind of ser+ice !or product". #or example. Co6op Mart can use the
same sur+ey A to examine the quality of all stores in the chain.
2?
CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
4.2 INFORMATION NEEDED
1n order to achie+e the ob>ecti+es of the research study as discussed in Chapter 4. and
based on -&o6factor model discussed in Chapter <. the follo&ing information is needed for
the researchE
Attributes of a supermar(et &hich construct the quality perception of customers.
Source: pre+ious research. focus group of customer. and management inter+ie&.
Characteristics of these attributes &hich determine the relationship bet&een attributes
performance and shopping preference of customers. Ho& does shopping preference of
customers beha+e &hen these attributes performance mo+e up and do&nP
Source: sur+ey A and sur+ey B.
Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu8s attributes performance in the perception of customer
and ho& much this performance le+el contributes to shopping preference of customers.
Source: sur+ey B.
5ecent operation of Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu store.
Source: management inter+ie& and obser+ation.
4.3 TARGET POPULATIONS
*rimary data of the research is collected through t&o (inds of sur+ey called sur+ey A and
sur+ey B. -hese t&o sur+eys are conducted on t&o target populations.
S.+/#6 A: uses the questionnaire called 9questionnaire A: !appendix A" to inter+ie&
customers of all supermar(ets in Ho Chi Minh City.
S.+/#6 B: uses the questionnaire called 9questionnaire B: !appendix B" to inter+ie&
Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu8s customers. &ho ha+e experiences of this
supermar(et8s ser+ices.
4.5 QUESTIONNAIRES DEVELOPMENT
4.5.2 S'.$(#$ ,''+().'#*
As the discussion in chapter <. quality attributes of supermar(et is generated by combining
unstructured inter+ie&s as in other multi6attribute models to reflect the specific quality of
supermar(et. My pre+ious research &ith collaborators suggests the list of A3 quality
attributes for supermar(et after many customer inter+ie&s and one focus group discussion.
%tarting &ith this list. con+enience of open hours and location &ere added to ma(e a list of
A2 attributes !appendix E".
-he list of A2 attributes &as shortened by a focus group discussion. -here are 2 male and <
female customers in the group. All of them &ere in+ited to the discussion after finishing
their shopping at Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu. -he moderator led the discussion from
preparation for shopping. &ent through self6shopping. then the billing process. All
attributes &hich are not related to these three processes &ere &iped off. %ome remained
attributes &ere combined and others &ere discarded because of unimportance. After the
2@
discussion. a short list of quality attributes &as established and this list has the agreement
of the &hole group.
-he opinions of Co6op Mart management &ere also ta(en into account. All attributes in the
list &ere discussed one by one. -he management decided to drop out some attributes &hich
they cannot impro+e or modify by >ust basing on this research. #or example. the location of
supermar(et is decided as a result of a series of researches and the con+enience of location
depended on customer8s residence so including this attribute into this research is not
rele+ant. 1n addition. there are many important attributes &hich are studied more
con+eniently by other methods such as obser+ation. incidence. etc. -hey are also excluded
from this research. for example. the a+ailability of loc(er. the a+ailability of shopping
trolley. the con+enience of entries. etc. -he management also added one more attribute
&hich &as not considered by customer but the management &ants to in+estigateE flexibility
of paying method. After all. the list of studied attributes &as completed &ith 2< items.
a!le ).1: #ist of studied attri!utes
4. Con+enience of par(ing
2. Hospitality of loc(er personnel
<. Agility of loc(er personnel
?. ;uality of merchandise
@. )ariety of product lines
A. )ariety of brand names and +arieties for each product line
C. 1ntroduction of ne& products
D. ,nique products &hich customers cannot find some&here else
B. %tore si'e
43. Con+enience of products arrangement for finding
44. Attracti+eness of products display
42. Air condition
4<. *rice le+el compared &ith other supermar(ets
4?. Hospitality of salesperson
4@. Expertise of salesperson in product information
4A. Helpfulness of salesperson in finding
4C. #lexibility of paying method !credit card. chec(R"
4D. Hospitality of cashier
4B. Accuracy of cashier
23. Agility of cashier
24. 5eturning unqualified products policy
22. Attracti+eness of promotion campaigns
2<. Con+enience of open hours
2A
Based on this list of attributes. both t&o questionnaires A and B &ere de+eloped. 1n
addition. these attributes could be classified by t&o &ays. by process and by category. for
analysis. -here are three main processesE shopping preparation. self6shopping. and billing.
-he attributes &hich are not classified into any process are considered as general attributes.
Attributes are also classified into four categoriesE facility. goods. personnel. and policy.
a!le ).2: 6ttri!utes classification
#acility /oods *ersonnel *olicy
%hopping preparation 4 2. <
%elf6shopping B. 42 ?. @. A. C. D.
43. 44
4?. 4@. 4A 4<
Billing 4D. 4B. 23 4C
/eneral 24. 22. 2<
4.5.3 P("' *.+/#6
Before launching the sur+eys. a pilot sur+ey &as conducted to test the questionnaire in
order to unco+er possible problems and chec( the +alidity of the expected information. #or
this purpose. a con+enient sample of 23 customers &as in+ited to ans&er the initial
questionnaires then gi+ing their feedbac(s.
Based on the pilot result. both questionnaires A and B &ere modified. $ordings of some
questions and the question arrangement &ere changed to be more appropriate. 1n addition.
the numbers &ere added to chec( boxes for more transparency !6< for strongly disagree. <
for strongly agree. 62. 64. 3. 4. 2 in bet&een". Moreo+er. the sur+ey method &as changed
from questionnaire distribution to structured inter+ie& &ith the support of questionnaire to
facilitate the accuracy of data.
4.4 SAMPLING PROCEDURE
%ince &e cannot determine the &hole population in detail !so &e can not reach each
customer &ith the same probability". the probability sampling !random sampling" is
infeasible !Holbert and %peece. 4BB<. p.CB. D4". -herefore. the con+enience sampling &as
used and the sample si'e &as determined by the rule of thumb !minimum sample si'e is <3
for each item". the bigger the sample si'e the more precise the statistics.
-he sample si'e of sur+ey A is <23 !N
A
M <23" and this sur+ey &as conducted in D
randomly chosen supermar(ets !appendix C" in Ho Chi Minh City !?3 inter+ie&s per
supermar(et" to capture the opinions of customers in Ho Chi Minh City.
-he pre6determined sample si'e of sur+ey B is <@3 but only <32 !N
B
M <32" inter+ie&s
&ere actually conducted due to the difficulty at the end of open hours. Based on the
a+erage distribution of bill quantity in a day. the sur+ey B8s inter+ie&s &ere conducted
!appendix C" but at the end of &or(ing hour !after 24E33". most of the customer refused the
inter+ie& because they are +ery hurry. -he reason for this arrangement is that the
assimilation of the inter+ie&8s distribution &ith the bill quantity8s distribution may increase
the representati+e property of the sample.
A pre6determined procedure to choose inter+ie&ee &as established to eliminate the
personal preference of field inter+ie&ers &hich is the source of bias. All the inter+ie&s
&ere conducted at the pre6determined time in the schedule !appendix C". -he customers
2C
&ho firstly finished billing process after these points of time in the schedule &ere chosen
for the inter+ie&. 1n the cases they refused the inter+ie& or they are not in the scope of the
research. the next customer &ould be the inter+ie&ee. #or excluding customers &ho +isit
supermar(et less than ? times in the year or &ho are under 4@. the inter+ie&er must as(
each customer before the inter+ie&.
4.7 SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS
4.7.2 S,&1"# A
Figure ).1: Respondents2 age of sample 6
3
@
43
4@
23
2@
<3
23 or
less
2462@ 2A6<3 <46<@ <A6?3 ?46?@ ?@ or
more
J
Figure ).2: Respondents2 fre4uenc& of shopping in supermarket of sample 6
3
43
23
<3
?3
many per
&ee(
4 per &ee( 4 per 2
&ee(s
4 per
month
less than 4
per month
J
Figure ).': Respondents2 a.erage spending for each shopping of sample 6
3
43
23
<3
?3
@3
A3
C3
less than 233.333 233.333 6
@33.333
@33.333 6
4.333.333
sometimes not
much. some times
+ery big amount
)ND
J
5espondents in sample A are mostly !B3.AJ" in the age of 24 to ?@ years old. -he range of
2A6<3 is the biggest group. accounts for 2CJ of the sample. C3J of the respondents are
2D
female. 1n a+erage. more than CDJ of respondents go to supermar(et from 4 per month to
4 per &ee( and more than B4J of them spend less than @33.333)ND for each shopping.
*articularly. more than A2J of them spend less than 233.333)ND for each shopping
!exchange rateE 4?.@33)ND M 4,%D". -herefore. the buying po&er of customer at
supermar(et in Ho Chi Minh City is not much.
4.7.3 S,&1"# B
Figure ).): Respondents2 age of sample 7
3
@
43
4@
23
2@
<3
23 or
less
2462@ 2A6<3 <46<@ <A6?3 ?46?@ ?@ or
more
J
Figure ).+: Respondents2 fre4uenc& of shopping in supermarket of sample 7
3
43
23
<3
?3
many per
&ee(
4 per &ee( 4 per 2
&ee(s
4 per
month
less than 4
per month
J
Figure ).-: Respondents2 a.erage spending for each shopping of sample 7
3
43
23
<3
?3
@3
A3
less than
233.333
233.333 6
@33.333
@33.333 6
4.333.333
more than
4.333.333
sometimes
not much.
some
times +ery
big
amount
)ND
J
5espondents in sample B are mostly !B4.?J" in the age of 24 to ?@ years old. Nearly C3J
of the respondents are female. 1n a+erage. nearly CDJ of respondents go to supermar(et
2B
from 4 per month to 4 per &ee( and more than B2J of them spend less than @33.333)ND
for each shopping. *articularly. more than @?J of them spend less than 233.333)ND for
each shopping. -he pattern of sample B is similar &ith sample A. Hence. the customer of
Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu is not so different to supermar(et8s customer in Ho Chi
Minh City.
<3
CHAPTER 7: FINDINGS ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
As discussion in chapter ?. all of the studied attributes are classified into ? categoriesE
facility. goods. personnel. and policy. -hese attributes &ill be analy'ed by -&o6factor
model as discussion in chapter <. Each attribute is presented in t&o6dimensional co6
ordinates by characteristic cur+e. -he hori'ontal axis represents performance le+el of an
attribute and the +ertical axis represents the shopping preference of customers contributed
by this performance le+el. -here are three critical points on the cur+e. one on the left is
negati+e point. one on the right is positi+e point. and one another in bet&een is current
point.
Moreo+er. preference gap and impro+ement efficiency are also used to analy'e quality
attributes. =n one hand. the larger the preference gap is. the more benefits the firm can
gain in term of shopping preference of customer to&ard its product or ser+ice by
impro+ing the attribute performance. =n the other hand. the higher the impro+ement
efficiency is. the more shopping preference amount the firm gains by impro+ing a certain
amount of attribute performance.
Based on the statistical analysis results !table D.2. D.<. D.?. D.@ in appendix D" and testing
!table D.A. D.C. D.D. D.B in appendix D". the characteristic cur+es8 co6ordinates. shopping
preferences. and impro+ement efficiencies of studied attributes are summari'ed !table D.43
in appendix D". All characteristic cur+es8 information and coefficients in this chapter are
extracted from this table.
7.2 FACILITY ATTRIBUTES ANALYSIS
-here are < attributes &hich belong to facility attribute categoryE con+enience of par(ing.
store si'e. and air condition. -he characteristic cur+es of air condition attribute !figure @.2"
and store si'e attribute !figure @.<" are similar. -hey are nearly absolute linear and
symmetric. -he characteristic cur+e of con+enience of par(ing attribute !figure @.4" is
slightly negati+e con+ex.
a!le +.1: Facilit& attri!utes
Attributes *reference gap
1mpro+ement
efficiency
4. Con+enience of par(ing 4.@3 3.C?
%ignificant at 3.33
S
42. Air condition 3.D4 3.@4
B. %tore si'e 3.C2 3.?@
#rom table @.4. the impro+ement efficiency of con+enience of par(ing attribute is
significant higher than those of the others. Hence. the impro+ement of par(ing con+enience
is most desirable. 1n addition. preference gap of this attribute is also higher than those of
others. 1t means that there is more room for impro+ement. As a result. &e should focus
more on par(ing attribute rather than air condition and store si'e attributes.
S
-ested by Monte Carlo simulation !table D.4< in appendix D"
<4
-he impro+ement efficiency and preference gap of air condition attribute and store si'e
attribute are not so different. -herefore. they are similar in terms of benefits from
impro+ement as &ell as room for impro+ement.
7.2.2 Cn/#n(#nc# - 1,+k(n%
Customers8 response re+eals that par(ing area of Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu is
some&hat con+enient but this con+enience contributes +ery little !>ust abo+e neutral" to
current shopping preference of customers. Ho&e+er. there are many rooms for increasing
shopping preference of customers by impro+ing this attribute than(s to high preference gap
and negati+e con+exity. -he in+estment in impro+ing this attribute is also highly beneficial
due to the high impro+ement efficiency.
-he expansion of par(ing areas is especially expensi+e and the trade off &ith operating
areas restricts this option. 5earrangement areas and &ay in. &ay out for more con+enience
may be a more feasible option. #or more con+enient to customer. some entries should be
opened to connect par(ing area &ith supermar(et so customers can go from par(ing area to
supermar(et and +ice +ersa directly. 5ecently. customer must go out of the par(ing area
before enter to supermar(et and +ice +ersa.
Figure +.1: Con.enience of parking
4.CD
3.2B
64.?B
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
par(ing
7.2.3 A(+ cn$('(n
%ince the characteristic cur+e of air condition attribute degenerates to be a straight line. the
impro+ement efficiency is also the regular co6efficient of the line. Hence. the impro+ement
of shopping preference of customers is linear &ith impro+ement of air condition
performance.
Air condition attribute of Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu is e+aluated quite &ell.
Customer8s response unco+ers that air condition is rather good. Ho&e+er. its contribution
to current shopping preference is abo+e neutral. 1n addition. the impro+ement efficiency is
lo& !table @.4". -herefore. &e should not focus on air condition impro+ement because
customers do not appreciate this attribute so much. -he impro+ement on this attribute &ill
not contribute significantly to shopping preference of customers. Ho&e+er. the rather high
<2
preference gap re+eals that there is room for shopping preference impro+ement by
impro+ing this attribute in future.
#or impro+ing air condition significantly. the recent distributed 43 small air6conditioners
system must be changed by a central air6conditioner. -his replacement pro>ect &ill
consume a lot of resources &hich could not be compensated by such an impro+ement of
shopping preference of customers. Hence. the old system is recommended to continue in
place. -he other ad+antage of the old system is that it can be easy modified by adding
some small air6conditioners. -his incremental impro+ement is reasonable for such an
attribute.
Figure +.2: 6ir condition
4.?B
3.AD
64.AC
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e air condition
7.2.5 S'+# *(B#
Figure +.': Store size
64.2C
3.A2
4.<@
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
store si'e
<<
%imilarity &ith air condition attribute. characteristic cur+e of store si'e attribute
degenerates to be a straight line. -he only difference of the t&o is that characteristic line of
air condition attribute is slightly steeper than that of store si'e attribute. 1t implies that the
impro+ement of shopping preference of customers caused by expanding store si'e is less
than by impro+ing air condition. 1n addition. the cost for store si'e expansion is much
larger than that for air condition. -herefore. the option of store si'e expansion is less
beneficial than impro+ing air condition.
Ho&e+er. it is &orth to consider this attribute &hen designing a ne& store in Co6op Mart
chain. 5emember that these sur+eys &ere conducted &hen the a+erage store si'e in
customer perception is about the si'e of Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu store. -his
percei+ed a+erage store si'e &ill increase +ery fast &hen customers reali'e the ad+antages
of many ne& larger stores &hich ha+e been opened for a year. Moreo+er. the larger store is
the common trend. -he si'e of future &ill be much larger and the customer perception &ill
change. -he decision for the ne& store si'e must be based on updated careful researches.
7.3 GOODS ATTRIBUTES ANALYSIS
%e+en attributes are classified into this category. Among them. quality of merchandise
attribute has the highest impro+ement efficiency. and then the +ariety of product lines
follo&s after. -he next three attributes. &hich ha+e high impro+ement efficiency. are
+ariety of brand names and +arieties for each product line. attracti+eness of products
display. and introduction of ne& products. At the bottom of the list. in order of
impro+ement efficiency. lays the con+enience of products arrangement for finding attribute
and unique products &hich customers cannot find some&here else attribute.
a!le +.2: 8oods attri!utes
Attributes
*reference
gap
1mpro+ement
efficiency
?. ;uality of merchandise 4.<2 4.3C
%ignificant at 3.2?
S
@. )ariety of product lines 3.DD 3.BA
%ignificant at 3.42
S
A. )ariety of brand names and +arieties for each
product line 3.C4 3.CC
44. Attracti+eness of products display 4.2? 3.C@
C. 1ntroduction of ne& products 4.<< 3.C<
%ignificant at 3.32
S
43. Con+enience of products arrangement for finding 3.B3 3.@A
D. ,nique products &hich customers cannot find
some&here else 4.<@ 3.@?
S
-ested by Monte Carlo simulation !table D.4< in appendix D"
<?
7.3.2 Q.,"('6 - &#+c0,n$(*#
-he characteristic cur+e of quality of merchandise attribute is slightly negati+e con+ex but
it could be considered as linear. -his cur+e is also nearly symmetric &ith angular co6
efficient of 4.3C !table @.2". 5eported customer perception indicates that quality of
merchandise is good and its contribution to current shopping preference of customers is
rather high. 1n despite of this high performance and contribution to shopping preference.
quality of merchandise is a promising attribute for impro+ement due to its higher than 4
impro+ement efficiency. #rom current performance to +ery good performance. any
increase in performance &ill create the faster increase in shopping preference. -his result is
not surprised. -he quality of merchandise is al&ays the most concerned issue in the
perception of customer. the quality first.
Figure +.): 9ualit& of merchandise
2.C4
4.<B
62.@B
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
quality of
merchandise
High quality leads to high price. Les. but there are some &ays to impro+e the quality of
merchandise &ith a reasonable price. By choosing good suppliers. chec(ing date and
quality of merchandises before putting on the shelf. and periodical chec(ing date to &eed
out6of6date merchandises out. the perception of customer about quality of merchandises in
the store &ill increase. An out6of6date product on the shelf &ill damage the quality image
of the &hole store. Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu has a quite good policy of quality
control inside the supermar(et !quality and date chec(ing at the beginning. &eeding out
products A months before the date for 26@ years dated product and 2 days for 462 &ee(s
dated products". Moreo+er. quality control should go up stream to the suppliers.
7.3.3 V,+(#'6 - 1+$.c' "(n#*, )+,n$ n,&#*, ,n$ /,+(#'(#*
Characteristic cur+es of +ariety of product lines attribute and +ariety of brand names and
+arieties attribute are nearly the same and both of them are nearly linear. %imilar to the
pattern of quality of merchandise attribute. they are symmetric linear attributes. Customers
agree that there are many product lines and there are many brand names and +arieties for
each product line. -hen these good performances contribute rather high portions to current
shopping preference of customers.
<@
Ha+ing a loo( at the list of items in Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu. &e &ill understand
&hy customers grade high score for these attributes performance. *roduct lines. brand
names and +arieties for each product line in the store are so +aried as a supermar(et in Ho
Chi Minh City. 1t has all common product lines in supermar(et in Ho Chi Minh City such
as household amenities and personal care products. cosmetics. ready6to6eat as &ell as fresh
foods. confectionary and coo(ing materials. foot&ear. clothing. some durable products. and
also some products &hich are not common in other supermar(ets such as children toys. etc.
=n a+erage. each product line has 43 to 23 brand namesG especially. for cosmetics. each
product line has more than 23 brand names.
Figure +.+: :ariet& of product lines; .ariet& of !rand names and .arieties for each product
line
62.2A
4.A2
2.@3
4.A2
2.<<
62.3B
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
product lines
brand names
and +arieties
Both of them are &orth to impro+e due to high impro+ement efficiency. Ho&e+er. the
difference bet&een these t&o attributes is the higher impro+ement efficiency of +ariety of
product lines attribute !table @.2". -herefore. from current performance to +ery good
performance. the impro+ement of +ariety of product lines attribute has more contribution
to shopping preference of customers than that of +ariety of brand names and +arieties for
each product line attribute. -he management should focus more on impro+ing the +ariety
of product lines attribute than impro+ing the +ariety of brand names and +arieties for each
product line.
7.3.5 P+$.c'* ,++,n%#&#n' ,n$ 1+$.c'* $(*1",6
Customers8 response indicates that performances of con+enience of products arrangement
for finding attribute and attracti+eness of products display attribute are rather good.
Ho&e+er. contribution of attracti+eness of products display to current shopping preference
of customers is >ust abo+e neutral and the con+enience of products arrangement contributes
to shopping preference of customers a little better.
$hile the characteristic cur+e of con+enience of products arrangement for finding attribute
is linear. characteristic cur+e of attracti+eness of products display attribute is slightly
negati+e con+ex. Although the former lays higher than the latter in the co6ordinates
expressing the higher contribution to shopping preference of customers. the latter should
<A
has higher priority for impro+ement because it has a higher angular co6efficient at current
point con+inced by higher impro+ement efficiency !table @.2" and negati+e con+exity. 1n
addition. the preference gap of attracti+eness of products display attribute is higher.
-herefore. it is more room to impro+e shopping preference of customers by increasing the
attracti+eness of product display.
$e ha+e an interesting remar( in figure @.A. $hen performances are lo&. customer focus
more on con+enience for finding but &hen performances reach an acceptable le+el. they
mo+e their attention to attracti+eness of products display.
Figure +.-: Con.enience of products arrangement for finding and attracti.eness of
products displa&
4.D3
3.DB
64.AB
64.C3
4.D@
3.A4
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
con+enience
for finding
attracti+eness
of products
display
7.3.4 In'+$.c'(n - n#! 1+$.c'*
Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu introduces 4 or 2 ne& products e+ery &ee(. mainly from
the proposition of suppliers and customer percei+es that introduction of ne& products
attribute is some&hat good. Ho&e+er. the contribution of this frequency to current
shopping preference of customers is >ust abo+e neutral.
-he impro+ement efficiency of this attribute is nearly equal &ith those of attracti+eness of
products display attribute and +ariety of brand names and +arieties attribute. 1n addition.
&ith one of the highest preference gap in goods category !table @.2" and the slightly
negati+e con+exity. ne& products introduction is &orth to in+est. Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh
Chieu could ma(e it better by acti+ely in+ol+ing into ne& products searching process
rather than >ust relying on suppliers.
<C
Figure +.<: 5ntroduction of new products
64.A4
3.@<
4.DA
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
introduction of
ne& products
7.3.7 Un(@.# 1+$.c'*
1n the perception of customers. there is nearly no unique product in Co6op Mart Nguyen
Dinh Chieu &hich they cannot find in other store and contribution to current shopping
preference of customers of this attribute is belo& neutral.
Figure +.=: >ni4ue products which customers cannot find somewhere else
4.33
63.<@
63.CB
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
unique
products
-he highly negati+e con+ex characteristic cur+e re+eals that customer &ill not feel &orse
e+en if there is no unique product in the store. Customers do not find unique products in
supermar(et. /etting some unique products in supermar(et by chance &ill ma(e them
happy but they do not expect to ha+e that. -he combination of lo&est impro+ement
efficiency and the highest preference gap in goods category !table @.2" re+eals that this
<D
attribute is less &orth to in+est in short6term but has potential for impro+ement in future
after all of high impro+ement efficiency attributes reach their potential.
7.5 PERSONNEL ATTRIBUTES ANALYSIS
Eight personnel attributes belong to three (inds of personnelE loc(er personnel.
salesperson. and cashier. Among them. agility and hospitality of loc(er personnel ha+e the
highest impro+ement efficiencies and then hospitality of cashier. -he next three attributes.
&hich ha+e high impro+ement efficiency. are hospitality of salesperson. expertise of
salesperson in product information. and agility of cashier. At the bottom of the list. in order
of impro+ement efficiency. are helpfulness of salesperson for finding and accuracy of
cashier.
-here is an interesting thing that hospitality attributes are most effecti+e to impro+e from
current performance. 1t is pro+ed by their highest impro+ement efficiencies in the list of
personnel attributes. if agility of loc(er personnel attribute is excluded.
a!le +.': Personnel attri!utes
Attributes *reference gap
1mpro+ement
efficiency
<. Agility of loc(er personnel 2.33 4.3@
%ignificant at 3.4C
S
2. Hospitality of loc(er personnel 4.BA 3.BD
%ignificant at 3.33
S
4D. Hospitality of cashier 4.4@ 3.C4
%ignificant at 3.4?
S
4?. Hospitality of salesperson 3.DD 3.A4
%ignificant at 3.<3
S
4@. Expertise of salesperson in product information 3.D3 3.@A
23. Agility of cashier 3.D2 3.@2
%ignificant at 3.4C
S
4A. Helpfulness of salesperson in finding 3.A? 3.?@
4B. Accuracy of cashier 3.@C 3.?<
Currently. the recruitment process in Co6op Mart is quite good. All personnel of Co6op
Mart &ill be selected according to their positions and trained for < months before &or(ing.
Ho&e+er. their performance could be impro+ed by some efforts such as periodical training.
special training to impro+e specific s(ills and attitudes. 1n addition. the moti+ation in
&or(ing is an important aspect &hich should be considered.
S
-ested by Monte Carlo simulation !table D.4< in appendix D"
<B
7.5.2 Lck#+ 1#+*nn#"
5eported customer perception indicates that loc(er personnel8s attributes are some&hat
good but these le+els of performance do not contribute positi+ely to shopping preference of
customers. Ho&e+er. &ith their negati+e con+ex characteristic cur+es and high
impro+ement efficiencies as &ell as +ery high preference gap !table @.<". these attributes
are the +aluable sources to increase shopping preference of customers. #rom the current
performance to +ery good performance. the impro+ement of loc(er personnel &ill increase
shopping preference of customers +ery fast.
-here is the slightly difference bet&een agility and hospitality of loc(er personnel
attributes. -he former attribute has higher impro+ement efficiency and preference gap
!table @.<". -herefore. the management should pay more attention on loc(er personnel8s
agility than hospitality.
Figure +.?: 6gilit& and hospitalit& of locker personnel
64.CB
4.C@
63.24
64.@4
4.B<
63.3D
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
agility
hospitality
7.5.3 S,"#*1#+*n
All of three attributes of salesperson are e+aluated the same. 5eported customer perception
unco+ers that their performance are rather good and their contribution to current shopping
preference of customers is some&hat high. -his high performance of salesperson attributes
is the result of a special training program in &hich the information of products and
products arrangement is updated e+ery day for salespeople at the beginning of the day and
salespeople in the second &or( shift are imparted by salespeople in the first &or( shift.
$hile characteristic cur+es of hospitality and expertise in product information of
salesperson attributes are linear. characteristic cur+e of helpfulness of salesperson in
finding attribute is slightly positi+e con+ex. 1t re+eals that helpfulness of salesperson in
finding attribute is less &orthy of impro+ement than other t&o. -he lo& impro+ement
efficiency and preference gap of this attribute !table @.<" also affirm this fact.
-he difference bet&een hospitality and expertise in product information of salesperson
attributes is the former has slightly higher impro+ement efficiency and preference gap
?3
!table @.<". Hence. the former has the highest priority to impro+e among salesperson
attributes.
Figure +.10: %ospitalit&; e@pertise in product information; and helpfulness in finding of
salesperson
62.32
4.42
2.33
4.24
2.33
64.B4
4.D@
4.24
64.D3
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
hospitality
information
expertise
helpfulness in
finding
7.5.5 C,*0(#+
Customers8 response indicates that three cashier attributes are rather good. Among them.
accuracy of cashier is e+aluated a little bit better. As a result. the contribution to current
shopping preference of customers of accuracy of cashier attribute is rather high &hile the
contribution of the other t&o is >ust some&hat high.
Figure +.11: %ospitalit&; accurac&; and agilit& of cashier
4.BA
3.D4
64.CC
62.4@
4.DA
4.2D
64.B?
3.BB
4.D3
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e hospitality
accuracy
agility
?4
Although shopping preference of customers contributed by accuracy attribute is more
sensiti+e !characteristic cur+e is steeper" to the mo+ement of performance than those of
others in general. -he negati+e con+exity ma(es it less sensiti+e to performance
impro+ement after current point. -his fact is pro+ed by the lo&est impro+ement efficiency
in personnel attributes list !table @.<". -herefore. the impro+ement after current point of
accuracy of cashier attribute &ill not contribute significantly to shopping preference of
customers. 1n addition. the lo&est preference gap !table @.<" indicates that there is less
room for impro+ement by this attribute.
Compared &ith hospitality attribute. agility attribute has lo&er impro+ement efficiency
!table @.<". 1n addition. agility of cashier characteristic cur+e is slightly positi+e con+ex.
Hence. it has lo&er priority to impro+e than hospitality of cashier attribute.
7.4 POLICY ATTRIBUTES ANALYSIS
Among fi+e policy attributes. price le+el compared &ith other supermar(ets attribute has
highest impro+ement efficiency. -&o next attributes are returning unqualified products
policy and attracti+eness of promotion campaigns. At the bottom of the list. in order of
impro+ement efficiency. are flexibility of paying method attribute and con+enience of open
hours attribute.
a!le +.): Polic& attri!utes
Attributes *reference gap
1mpro+ement
efficiency
4<. *rice le+el compared &ith other supermar(ets 4.3? 3.D<
%ignificant at 3.33
S
24. 5eturning unqualified products policy 4.<D 3.@3
22. Attracti+eness of promotion campaigns 4.42 3.?D
%ignificant at 3.34
S
4C. #lexibility of paying method 3.A@ 3.<4
2<. Con+enience of open hours 3.@2 3.<4
7.4.2 P+(c# "#/#"
Customers8 response re+eals that price le+el of Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu is rather
lo& compared &ith other supermar(ets. Moreo+er. it is one of the attributes &hich ha+e
highest contribution to current shopping preference of customers e+en though its
performance is not good as those of quality of merchandise attribute or +ariety of products
attributes. 1t indicates the importance of price factor in customers8 mind.
-he rather high performance in the perception of customer is not an accidental gift but the
result of a strategic policy. *rice of merchandise is set equal to lo&er than that of other
supermar(ets. -he management tries to position Co6op Mart as a lo& price supermar(et
chain.
-he characteristic cur+e of price le+el attribute is symmetric linear. 1t means that its effect
on shopping preference of customers is symmetric. -he shopping preference of customers
S
-ested by Monte Carlo simulation !table D.4< in appendix D"
?2
increased &hen lo&er the price is equal to the shopping preference of customers decreased
&hen higher the price. Although price le+el attribute has the highest impro+ement
efficiency and high preference gap !table @.?". the lo&er price is not recommended because
of the direct trade off &ith profits of the store. -he result of this research is used to unco+er
the current performance as &ell as the contribution of this attribute to customer rather than
for impro+ement recommendation. #or the latter purpose. a price elasticity research should
be conducted.
Figure +.12: Price le.el compared with other supermarkets
62.@<
4.?<
2.?C
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e price le+el
7.4.3 R#'.+n(n% .n@.,"(-(#$ 1+$.c'*
%ince any quality problem is responsible by suppliers. Co6op Mart is ready to change a
ne& one to any unqualified product. Ho&e+er. reported customer perception indicates that
returning unqualified product policy and its contribution to current shopping preference of
customers are >ust abo+e neutral. -he reason may be the pre>udice that customers are
un&elcome &hen they complain about quality and it is not &orth to complain. -herefore.
the percei+ed performance of this attribute may be impro+ed by simply inform customer
the policy of the store clearly through ad+ertisement or other &ays. A small incenti+e for
unqualified product disclosure in one special period may be a good &ay to educate
customer this policy.
-he slightly positi+e con+ex characteristic cur+e of this attribute re+eals that the decrease
in performance &ill affect shopping preference of customers more than the increase in
performance. Although the impro+ement efficiency of this attribute is lo&. this attribute is
&orth to impro+e due to the lo& cost for performance impro+ement !the performance is
already good but the percei+ed performance is not as good due to information problem. the
cost to impro+e percei+e performance is the cost to inform customer" and high preference
gap !table @.?".
Figure +.1': Returning un4ualified products polic&
?<
64.C4
3.<<
4.C4
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e returning
unqualified
products
7.4.5 P+&'(n c,&1,(%n*
5eported customers8 response indicates that attracti+eness of promotion campaigns is >ust
abo+e neutral and its contribution to current shopping preference of customers is neutral.
-his result re+eals the fact that promotion campaigns of Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu
are similar to those of other supermar(ets !most of promotion campaigns are sponsored by
suppliers" and this le+el of performance does not affect current shopping preference of
customers.
Figure +.1): 6ttracti.eness of promotion campaigns
4.2A
3.4?
64.3D
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e promotion
campaigns
-he slightly negati+e con+ex characteristic cur+e of this attribute indicates that the increase
in performance &ill affect shopping preference of customers more than the decrease in
performance. $ith the lo& impro+ement efficiency. it is recommended to (eep this
??
performance. Ho&e+er. for long6term strategy. this attribute should be considered due to
high preference gap !table @.?".
7.4.4 P,6(n% &#'0$
Although Co6op Mart accepts many (inds of paying method including )isa card. Master
card. and domestic credit card such as ACB card. customer perception indicates that paying
method attribute is some&hat flexibility. Ho&e+er. its contribution to current shopping
preference of customers is neutral. 1t unco+ers that customers are not interested in this
flexibility and other paying methods !rather than cash" is not popular in Ho Chi Minh City.
-he +ery lo& impro+ement efficiency and preference gap !table @.?" con+ince that it is not
&orth to impro+e this attribute. Although the negati+e con+ex characteristic cur+e of this
attribute re+eals that remo+ing all additional paying methods &ill not decrease shopping
preference of customers significantly. this attribute is recommended to be unchanged
because the cost to maintain this flexibility is not much and this flexibility &ill be
beneficial in future &hen those paying methods become popular in Ho Chi Minh City.
Figure +.1+: Fle@i!ilit& of pa&ing method
3.A<
63.32
63.?@
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e flexibility of
paying
method
7.4.7 O1#n 0.+*
Co6op Mart opens from DE33am to 43E33pm. -hese open hours are rather con+enient as the
response of customers. Although the contribution of this con+enience to current shopping
preference of customers is some&hat high. the impro+ement of con+enience of open hours
attribute from current performance is not &orth because it is con+enient enough for
customer. -his conclusion is pro+ed by the lo&est impro+ement efficiency and preference
gap among 2< studied attributes !table D.44 and table D.42 in appendix D".
1n addition. a positi+e con+ex characteristic cur+e of con+enience of open hours attribute
re+eals that the decrease of shopping preference of customers caused by the decrease of
this attribute performance is much more significant &hile the increase in shopping
preference of customers caused by performance impro+ement is not significant. -herefore.
the open hours should be unchanged.
?@
Figure +.1-: Con.enience of open hours
4.C4
4.4B
64.C<
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e con+enience
of open hours
7.7 TWO-FACTOR MODEL VS. SERVQUAL
-he third critique of %er+qual in chapter < raises a critical problem of %er+qual8s
managerial implication. -he findings of this research &ill illustrate this problem by using
-&o6factor analysis.
%er+qual measures ser+ice quality based on the gap bet&een current performance and
customer expectation and sets up impro+ement priority based on the magnitude of this gap.
-he implication of this model is that the impro+ement of an attribute &hich has bigger *6E
gap &ill pro+ide more benefits than impro+ement of an attribute &hich has smaller *6E gap
so the former has higher priority to impro+e.
-he analysis results of this research unco+er that the implication abo+e is fla&ed. #or
example. the performance gaps of unique product. returning unqualified product policy.
attracti+eness of promotion campaigns. flexibility of paying method. and con+enience of
open hours attributes are large but their performance impro+ement &ill not contribute
significantly to shopping preference of customers !sections @.2.@. @.?.2. @.?.<. @.?.?. @.?.@".
-he reason is that this implication is based on t&o fla&ed assumptionsE the relationship
bet&een attribute performance and a benefit related factor !such as shopping preference.
purchase intension. etc" is linear and this benefit related factor has the same sensiti+ity
!angular co6efficient" &ith performance of e+ery attribute.
-he findings of this research re+eal that the later assumption is not correct. -he sensiti+ity
of shopping preference &ith attributes performance is different from attribute to attribute
!figures @.4 to @.4A". Ho&e+er. this problem could be some&hat o+ercome by using
important le+el in addition to %er+qual. -he important le+el of each attribute could be
considered as its sensiti+ity. -he more important the attribute is. the more sensiti+e the
benefit related factor &ith this attribute is. Ho&e+er. ho& to combine performance gap and
important le+el into one measure to set up the impro+ement priorities is not an easy
problem. Bet&een an attribute &hich has higher important le+el and an attribute &hich has
bigger performance gap. &hich one has more priority to impro+eP
?A
Figure +.1<: Con.enience of open hours and 4ualit& of merchandise
62.@B
4.C4
4.4B
64.C<
4.<B
2.C4
6<
62
64
3
4
2
<
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
performance
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g

p
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
open hours
quality of
merchandise
Moreo+er. the biggest pitfall of %er+qual may be the linearity assumption. -he result of this
research pro+es that the relationship of shopping preference of customers !one of benefit
related factors" and attribute performance does not only +ary in term of sensiti+ity but may
be also con+ex. #or example. the gap bet&een current performance and +ery good
performance of con+enience of open hours attribute is larger than that of quality of
merchandise attribute. but the impro+ement of open hours attribute from current
performance &ill not contribute significantly to shopping preference of customers !figure
@.4C". 1n contrast. a little impro+ement in quality of merchandise attribute &ill cause
significant impro+ement in shopping preference of customers. -he reason is that the
positi+e con+exity of con+enience of open hours characteristic cur+e !figure @.4C" ma(es it
less sensiti+e to impro+ement after the current point. =ther characteristic cur+es also re+eal
that this example is not an exceptional case. many characteristic cur+e are not linear but
may be negati+e con+ex or positi+e con+ex !figures @.4 to @.4A".
Besides. -&o6factor model pro+ides more information than %er+qual such asE contribution
of current performance to shopping preference of customers. preference gap. ho& shopping
preference of customers &ill beha+e if performance increases. and ho& shopping
preference of customers &ill beha+e if performance decreases. -hese (inds of information
are also helpful for quality management as discussion in pre+ious sections of this chapter.
?C
CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSION
8.2 PRESENT CUSTOMER PERCEPTION
By using -&o6factor model to examine the quality of Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu. the
research study pro+ides the current percei+ed performances of 2< studied attributes and
their contributions to shopping preference of customers as follo&ingE
a!le -.1: Present customer perception
P#+-+&,nc# "#/#"
C

n
'
+
(
)
.
'
(

n

'

*
0

1
1
(
n
%

1
+
#
-
#
+
#
n
c
#

-

c
.
*
'

&
#
+
*
Abo+e neutral
3.2@ Q 3.C@
%ome&hat good
3.C@ Q 4.2@
5ather good
4.2@ Q 4.C@
/ood
4.C@ Q 2.2@
5
a
t
h
e
r

h
i
g
h
4
.
2
@

Q

4
.
C
@
4<. *rice le+el
compared &ith other
supermar(ets
4B. Accuracy of
cashier
?. ;uality of
merchandise
@. )ariety of
product lines
A. )ariety of
brand names
and +arieties
for each
product line
%
o
m
e
&
h
a
t

h
i
g
h
3
.
C
@

Q

4
.
2
@
43. Con+enience of
products arrangement
for finding
4?. Hospitality of
salesperson
4@. Expertise of
salesperson in
product information
4A. Helpfulness of
salesperson in finding
4D. Hospitality of
cashier
23. Agility of cashier
2<. Con+enience of
open hours
A
b
o
+
e

n
e
u
t
r
a
l
3
.
2
@

Q

3
.
C
@
24. 5eturning
unqualified
products
policy
4. Con+enience
of par(ing
C. 1ntroduction
of ne& products
B. %tore si'e
44. Attracti+eness of
products display
42. Air condition
?D
N
e
u
t
r
a
l
!
6
3
.
2
@
"

Q

3
.
2
@
22.
Attracti+eness
of promotion
campaigns
2. Hospitality of
loc(er
personnel
<. Agility of
loc(er
personnel
4C. #lexibility
of paying
method
B
e
l
o
&

n
e
u
t
r
a
l
!
6
3
.
C
@
"

Q

!
6
3
.
2
@
"
D. ,nique
products
&hich
customers
cannot find
some&here
else
NoteE 6<M strongly disagreeG <M strongly agree
Among all. quality of merchandise attribute. +ariety of product lines attribute. +ariety of
brand names and +arieties for each product line attribute are the best performance
attributes. -hese &ell performed attributes. price le+el compared &ith other supermar(ets
attribute. and accuracy of cashier attribute together contribute the highest portions to
shopping preference of customers to&ards Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu.
1n contrast. returning unqualified products policy. attracti+eness of promotion campaigns.
and unique products &hich customers cannot find some&here else attributes ha+e lo&est
performance. Among them. unique products attribute contributes the lo&est portion !e+en
negati+e" to shopping preference of customers.
8.3 IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY
Based on current perception of customers and characteristics of studied attributes
expressed by characteristic cur+e. impro+ement efficiency. and preference gap. 2< studied
attributes are classified into < groups for impro+ement implementationE impro+ing
performance. reser+ing for impro+ement. and (eeping current performance.
8.3.2 I&1+/(n% 1#+-+&,nc#
-he first group includes attributes &hich are needed to impro+e their performance and
these impro+ements &ill contribute significantly to shopping preference of customers.
-hey areE
Attributes &hich ha+e high impro+ement efficiency because shopping preference of
customers is +ery highly sensiti+e to attribute performance !steepest characteristic
cur+es"E quality of merchandise. +ariety of product lines. and +ariety of brand names
and +arieties for each product line.
?B
Attributes &hich ha+e high impro+ement efficiency because of negati+e con+ex
characteristic cur+e and lo& current performanceE agility of loc(er personnel.
hospitality of loc(er personnel. attracti+eness of products display. con+enience of
par(ing. and introduction of ne& products.
Attribute &hich has high impro+ement efficiency because current performance is
lo& and shopping preference of customers is rather highly sensiti+e to attribute
performance !steep characteristic cur+e"E hospitality of cashier.
Attribute &hich has lo& impro+ement efficiency but high preference gap and could
be impro+ed simultaneously &ith other attributes in this groupE hospitality of
salesperson !impro+ed simultaneously &ith hospitality of loc(er personnel and
hospitality of cashier by personnel training".
Attribute &hich has lo& impro+ement efficiency but high preference gap and the
cost for impro+ing is lo&E returning unqualified products policy !the policy itself is
good. the cost for impro+ement is the cost to inform customer this policy".
8.3.3 R#*#+/(n% -+ (&1+/#&#n'
-he second group includes attributes &hich are not necessary to impro+e in short6term and
they are less efficient for impro+ement than those in the first group. Ho&e+er. they are the
potential sources for impro+ing shopping preference of customers &hen all of attributes in
the first group reach their potential. -hey areE
Attributes &hich ha+e lo& impro+ement efficiency but high preference gap. -he
reason is that the distance bet&een contribution to shopping preference of customers
of current performance and of +ery good performance is high but current
performance is far behind +ery good performanceE attracti+eness of promotion
campaigns. unique products &hich customers cannot find some&here else.
con+enience of products arrangement for finding. agility of cashier. air condition.
and expertise of salesperson in product information.
8.3.5 K##1(n% c.++#n' 1#+-+&,nc#
Attributes in the third group are not necessary to impro+e the performances. -heir current
performances are good enough and should be maintained. -his group includesE
Attributes &hich ha+e lo& impro+ement efficiency and lo& preference gap because
shopping preference of customers is less sensiti+e to attribute performance !flat
characteristic cur+e"E flexibility of paying method and store si'e !this attribute is also
+ery difficult to impro+e".
Attributes &hich ha+e lo& impro+ement efficiency and lo& preference gap because
of positi+e con+ex characteristic cur+e and current performance is at the threshold.
additional impro+ement is not necessaryE con+enience of open hours. accuracy of
cashier. and helpfulness of salesperson in finding.
Attribute &hich has high impro+ement efficiency but there is the direct trade off
&ith profitsE price le+el compared &ith other supermar(ets.
8.3.4 I&1+/#&#n' 1+(+('(#*
*erformances of attributes in the third group are maintained as current le+els. Attributes in
the first group &ill be impro+ed firstly. $hen they reach their potential. supermar(et
@3
cannot gain more shopping preference of customers by impro+ing these attributes. After
that. attributes in the second group &ill be impro+ed to gain more shopping preference of
customers. 1n addition. there are the priorities for impro+ement &ithin each group. in the
order of impro+ement efficiency.
-he highest priority attributes for impro+ement are quality of merchandise. agility of
loc(er personnel. hospitality of personnel and +ariety of product lines attributes. -hey are
the (eys to impro+e percei+ed quality !percei+ed performance and shopping preference" of
Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu in the perception of customers. -he management should
focus resources to impro+e these attributes then impro+e other attributes according to the
priorities in table A.2 and table A.<.
a!le -.2: 5mpro.ement priorities of the first group
*riorities
Attributes
1mpro+ement
efficiency
4 ?. ;uality of merchandise 4.3C
2 <. Agility of loc(er personnel 4.3@
< 2. 4?. 4D. Hospitality of personnel 3.BD
?
? @. )ariety of product lines 3.BA
@ A. )ariety of brand names and +arieties for each product line 3.CC
A 44. Attracti+eness of products display 3.C@
C 4. Con+enience of par(ing 3.C?
D C. 1ntroduction of ne& products 3.C<
B 24. 5eturning unqualified products policy 3.@3
@
a!le -.': 5mpro.ement priorities of the second group
*riorities
Attributes
1mpro+ement
efficiency
4 43. Con+enience of products arrangement for finding 3.@A
2 4@. Expertise of salesperson in product information 3.@A
< D. ,nique products &hich customers cannot find some&here
else 3.@?
? 23. Agility of cashier 3.@2
@ 42. Air condition 3.@4
A 22. Attracti+eness of promotion campaigns 3.?D
Ho&e+er. as mentioned earlier. this research focuses mostly on benefit side. -hese
priorities should be implemented in the integration &ith cost analysis.
?
1mpro+ement efficiency of hospitality of loc(er personnel attribute. the highest impro+ement efficiency of
hospitality of personnel attributes.
@
7o& impro+ement efficiency but high preference gap and lo& cost for impro+ing.
@4
8.5 TWO-FACTOR MODEL
Based on ano8s concept. -&o6factor model is de+eloped to examine the quality of a
ser+ice !it is also applicable to product quality" and set up priorities for quality
impro+ement. -he concept of -&o6factor model is that quality is measured through
performance le+el of a set of attributes and the contribution of these attributes to shopping
preference of customers !or other benefits related factors such as purchase intension". -he
relationship of these t&o measures of each attribute is presented by a characteristic cur+e in
&hich current point represents the current situation of the attribute and negati+e. positi+e
points represent the &orst and the best case of this attribute. respecti+ely.
#indings of this research study re+eal that the relationships of performance and
contribution to shopping preference of customers of attributes are different from attribute
to attribute. -hese relationships are represented by characteristic cur+es &hich +ary in
con+exity and steepness. -herefore. using performance gap to set up the priorities for
quality impro+ement as in %er+qual model is not accurate. Closing a large performance gap
may not increase the shopping preference of customers significantly. -he quality
impro+ement priorities should be decided by the contribution of closing the performance
gap to shopping preference of customers in an incremental manner !represented by
impro+ement efficiency and preference gap" rather than the performance gap itself.
1n addition to the accuracy in setting up the priorities for quality impro+ement. -&o6factor
model pro+ides more useful information for quality management such asE contribution of
current performance to shopping preference of customers. ho& shopping preference of
customers &ill beha+e if performance increases. and ho& shopping preference of
customers &ill beha+e if performance decreases. -hese (inds of information add predicti+e
po&er to the model.
Ho&e+er. it is too soon to conclude that -&o6factor model is better than other models
&hich &ere &ell de+eloped through many years. -&o6factor model is introduced as a ne&
approach to measure ser+ice or product quality rather than a superior model. Additional
theoretical and empirical researches are needed to further examine the strengths as &ell as
the &ea(nesses of this model.
@2
APPENDIC A: QUESTIONNAIRE A
*laceE TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
QUESTIONNAIRE
N'(c#: All of the follo&ing questions are for *#"--*#+/(c# *'+# of supermar(et only. -he term
9supermar(et: should be understood as this store. not the &hole supermar(et.
Q.#*'(n 2: A *.1#+&,+k#' (* &6 -,/+('# *011(n% c#n'#+ (- (' 0,* -""!(n% ,''+().'#*:
%trongly
disagree
%trongly
agree
4. -he par(ing is +ery con+enient 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
2. 7oc(er personnel is +ery hospitable 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
<. 7oc(er personnel is +ery agile 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
?. ;uality of merchandise is +ery good 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
@. -here are lots of product lines 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
A. -here are lots of brand names and +arieties for
each product line
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
C. Ne& products are introduced +ery frequently 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
D. -here are many unique products &hich you cannot
find some&here else
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
B. -he store si'e is +ery large 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
43. *roducts arrangement is +ery con+enient for
finding
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
44. *roducts display is +ery attracti+e 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
42. Air condition is +ery good 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4<. *rice le+el is +ery cheap compared &ith other
supermar(ets
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4?. %alesperson is +ery hospitable 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4@. %alesperson can pro+ide product information +ery
exactly
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4A. %alesperson can help you find &hat you need
immediately
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4C. *aying method is +ery flexible !credit card.
chec(R"
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4D. Cashier is +ery hospitable 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4B. Cashier is +ery accurate 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
@<
23. Cashier is +ery agile 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
24. 5eturning unqualified products is +ery &elcome 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
22. *romotion campaigns are +ery attracti+e 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
2<. =pen hours are +ery con+enient 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
Q.#*'(n 3: #rom the list of attributes abo+e. could you please specify the three most
important attributesP

Q.#*'(n 5: A *.1#+&,+k#' (* *'("" &6 -,/+('# *011(n% c#n'#+ #/#n '0.%0 (' 0,*
-""!(n% ,''+().'#*:
/Ahen considering each attri!ute; other attri!utes are normal1
%trongly
disagree
%trongly
agree
4. -he par(ing is +ery incon+enient 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
2. 7oc(er personnel is +ery cross6grained 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
<. 7oc(er personnel is +ery slo& 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
?. ;uality of merchandise is +ery bad 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
@. -here are only some product lines 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
A. -here is only one brand name and +ariety for each
product line
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
C. Ne& products are introduced rarely 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
D. -here is no unique products &hich you cannot find
some&here else
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
B. -he store si'e is +ery small 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
43. *roducts arrangement is +ery incon+enient for
finding
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
44. *roducts display is +ery gloomy 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
42. -here is no air condition 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4<. *rice le+el is +ery expensi+e compared &ith other
supermar(ets
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4?. %alesperson is +ery cross6grained 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4@. %alesperson cannot pro+ide product information 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4A. %alesperson cannot help you find &hat you need 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4C. -he only paying method is cash 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4D. Cashier is +ery cross6grained 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
@?
4B. Cashier is +ery inaccurate 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
23. Cashier is +ery slo& 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
24. 5eturning unqualified products is not allo&ed 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
22. -here is no promotion 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
2<. =pen hours are +ery incon+enient 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
Q.#*'(n 4: P#+*n," (n-+&,'(n
/enderE Male #emale
AgeE TTTTTTTTTTTTTT
Ho& often do you go to supermar(et !&here+er"P
many per &ee( 4 per &ee( 4 per 2 &ee(s
4 per month rarely !less than 4 per month"
Ho& much is a+erage spending each time you go to supermar(etP
less than 233.333 233.333 Q @33.333 @33.333 Q 4.333.333
more than 4.333.333 sometimes not much. some times +ery big amount
THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP D
@@
APPENDIC B: QUESTIONNAIRE B
-imeE TTTTTTTTTT DateE TTTTTTTTTTT
QUESTIONNAIRE
N'(c#: All of the follo&ing questions are for *#"--*#+/(c# *'+# of supermar(et only. -he term
9supermar(et: should be understood as this store. not the &hole supermar(et.
Q.#*'(n 2: P"#,*# #/,".,'# C-1 M,+' N%.6#n D(n0 C0(#. )6 -""!(n% ,''+().'#*:
%trongly
disagree
%trongly
agree
4. -he par(ing is con+enient 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
2. 7oc(er personnel is hospitable 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
<. 7oc(er personnel is agile 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
?. ;uality of merchandise is good 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
@. -here are many product lines 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
A. -here are many brand names and +arieties for each
product line
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
C. Ne& products are introduced frequently 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
D. -here are some unique products &hich you cannot
find some&here else
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
B. -he store si'e is large 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
43. *roducts arrangement is con+enient for finding 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
44. *roducts display is attracti+e 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
42. Air condition is good 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4<. *rice le+el is cheap compared &ith other
supermar(ets
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4?. %alesperson is hospitable 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4@. %alesperson can pro+ide product information
exactly
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4A. %alesperson can help you find &hat you need
quic(ly
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4C. *aying method is flexible !credit card. chec(R" 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4D. Cashier is hospitable 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4B. Cashier is accurate 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
23. Cashier is agile 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
@A
24. 5eturning unqualified products is &elcome 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
22. *romotion campaigns are attracti+e 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
2<. =pen hours are con+enient 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
Q.#*'(n 3: T0#+#-+#, C-1 M,+' N%.6#n D(n0 C0(#. (* c0*#n ,* 6.+ *011(n%
c#n'#+ +,'0#+ '0,n '0#+ *.1#+&,+k#'* )#c,.*# -:
%trongly
disagree
%trongly
agree
4. Con+enience of par(ing 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
2. Hospitality of loc(er personnel 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
<. Agility of loc(er personnel 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
?. ;uality of merchandise 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
@. )ariety of product lines 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
A. )ariety of brand names and +arieties for each
product line
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
C. 1ntroduction of ne& products 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
D. ,nique products &hich you cannot find some&here
else
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
B. %tore si'e 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
43. Con+enience of products arrangement for finding 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
44. Attracti+eness of products display 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
42. Air condition 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4<. *rice le+el compared &ith other supermar(ets 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4?. Hospitality of salesperson 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4@. Expertise of salesperson in product information 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4A. Helpfulness of salesperson in finding &hat you
need
6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4C. #lexibility of paying method !credit card. chec(R" 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4D. Hospitality of cashier 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
4B. Accuracy of cashier 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
23. Agility of cashier 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
24. 5eturning unqualified products policy 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
22. Attracti+eness of promotion campaigns 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
2<. Con+enience of open hours 6< 62 64 3 4 2 <
@C
Q.#*'(n 5: #rom the list of attributes abo+e. could you please specify three attributes &hich
you &ant Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu impro+e mostlyP

Q.#*'(n 4: P#+*n," (n-+&,'(n
/enderE Male #emale
AgeE TTTTTTTTTTTTTT
Ho& often do you go to supermar(et !&here+er"P
many per &ee( 4 per &ee( 4 per 2 &ee(s
4 per month rarely !less than 4 per month"
Ho& much is a+erage spending each time you go to supermar(etP
less than 233.333 233.333 Q @33.333 @33.333 Q 4.333.333
more than 4.333.333 sometimes not much. some times +ery big amount
THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP D
@D
APPENDIC C: INTERVIEW SCHEDULE
a!le C.1: Schedule of sur.e& 6
Date *lace No. ;uestionnaire No. 1nter+ie&er
4<04 4. Co6op Mart Dam %en ?3 2
4?04 2. Co6op Mart Hau /iang ?3 4
4@04 <. Mien Dong ?3 4
4A04 ?. Co6op Mart Nguyen Dinh Chieu ?3 4
4C04 @. *acific Mart ?3 4
4D04 A. %aigon -enmart ?3 4
4B04 C. #oodcomart ?3 4
2304 D. Maximart ?3 4
#rom BE33 to 24E33. e+ery inter+ie& for each 4@6minute.
brea( timeE 42E33 to 4<E33 and 4DE33 to 4BE33
Except 4<04. from 4AE33 to 24E33. e+ery 2 inter+ie&s for each 4@6minute.
no brea( time.
a!le C.2: Schedule of sur.e& 7
#rom 4@04 to 2404. in Co6op Mart6op Nguyen Dinh Chieu !4 inter+ie&er"E
No. -ime No. -ime No. -ime No. -ime No. -ime
4 43E33 44 44E?3 24 4@E<3 <4 4CE?3 ?4 23E23
2 43E43 42 44E@3 22 4@E?@ <2 4CE@3 ?2 23E<3
< 43E23 4< 4<E33 2< 4AE33 << 4BE33 ?< 23E?3
? 43E<3 4? 4<E23 2? 4AE4@ <? 4BE43 ?? 23E@3
@ 43E?3 4@ 4<E?3 2@ 4AE<3 <@ 4BE23 ?@ 24E33
A 43E@3 4A 4?E33 2A 4AE?@ <A 4BE<3 ?A 24E43
C 44E33 4C 4?E23 2C 4CE33 <C 4BE?3 ?C 24E23
D 44E43 4D 4?E?3 2D 4CE43 <D 4BE@3 ?D 24E<3
B 44E23 4B 4@E33 2B 4CE23 <B 23E33 ?B 24E?3
43 44E<3 23 4@E4@ <3 4CE<3 ?3 23E43 @3 24E@3
Brea( timeE 42E33 to 4<E33 and 4DE33 to 4BE33
@B
APPENDIC D: DATA ANALYSIS
a!le ,.1: :aria!les coding
Attribute
%hopping
preference
contributed
by +ery good
performance
%hopping
preference
contributed
by +ery bad
performance
Current
performance
%hopping
preference
contributed
by current
performance
4. Con+enience of par(ing *=%4 NE/4 *E54 *5E4
2. Hospitality of loc(er personnel *=%2 NE/2 *E52 *5E2
<. Agility of loc(er personnel *=%< NE/< *E5< *5E<
?. ;uality of merchandise *=%? NE/? *E5? *5E?
@. )ariety of product lines *=%@ NE/@ *E5@ *5E@
A. )ariety of brand names and
+arieties for each product line
*=%A NE/A *E5A *5EA
C. 1ntroduction of ne& products *=%C NE/C *E5C *5EC
D. ,nique products &hich customers
cannot find some&here else
*=%D NE/D *E5D *5ED
B. %tore si'e *=%B NE/B *E5B *5EB
43.Con+enience of products
arrangement for finding
*=%43 NE/43 *E543 *5E43
44.Attracti+eness of products display *=%44 NE/44 *E544 *5E44
42.Air condition *=%42 NE/42 *E542 *5E42
4<.*rice le+el compared &ith other
supermar(ets
*=%4< NE/4< *E54< *5E4<
4?.Hospitality of salesperson *=%4? NE/4? *E54? *5E4?
4@.Expertise of salesperson in product
information
*=%4@ NE/4@ *E54@ *5E4@
4A.Helpfulness of salesperson in
finding
*=%4A NE/4A *E54A *5E4A
4C.#lexibility of paying method
!credit card. chec(R"
*=%4C NE/4C *E54C *5E4C
4D.Hospitality of cashier *=%4D NE/4D *E54D *5E4D
4B.Accuracy of cashier *=%4B NE/4B *E54B *5E4B
23.Agility of cashier *=%23 NE/23 *E523 *5E23
24.5eturning unqualified products
policy
*=%24 NE/24 *E524 *5E24
A3
22.Attracti+eness of promotion
campaigns
*=%22 NE/22 *E522 *5E22
2<.Con+enience of open hours *=%2< NE/2< *E52< *5E2<
a!le ,.2: Shopping preference contri!uted !& .er& good performance
N Min Max 7o&er Mean ,pper %td. De+
*=%4 <23 64 < 4.AC 4.CD 4.B3 4.3?
*=%2 <23 64 < 4.AA 4.C@ 4.D? 3.CB
*=%< <23 64 < 4.D? 4.B< 2.34 3.CB
*=%? <23 3 < 2.A@ 2.C4 2.CC 3.@A
*=%@ <23 3 < 2.?? 2.@3 2.@C 3.A4
*=%A <23 3 < 2.2@ 2.<< 2.?4 3.C<
*=%C <23 64 < 4.C@ 4.DA 4.BA 3.B@
*=%D <23 62 < 3.DD 4.33 4.4< 4.4@
*=%B <23 64 < 4.2? 4.<@ 4.?A 4.33
*=%43 <23 64 < 4.C2 4.D3 4.DC 3.C3
*=%44 <23 3 < 4.CD 4.D@ 4.B< 3.C3
*=%42 <23 64 < 4.<B 4.?B 4.@D 3.DC
*=%4< <23 64 < 2.<B 2.?C 2.@@ 3.C@
*=%4? <23 64 < 4.B4 2.33 2.3B 3.D4
*=%4@ <23 64 < 4.B< 2.33 2.3D 3.AB
*=%4A <23 64 < 4.CA 4.D@ 4.B< 3.CB
*=%4C <23 62 < 3.?B 3.A< 3.CA 4.2@
*=%4D <23 64 < 4.DD 4.BA 2.3? 3.C2
*=%4B <23 62 < 4.CA 4.DA 4.BA 3.B4
*=%23 <23 6< < 4.C4 4.D3 4.B3 3.DD
*=%24 <23 6< < 4.A3 4.C4 4.D2 4.33
*=%22 <23 6< < 4.42 4.2A 4.?3 4.2D
*=%2< <23 6< < 4.A3 4.C4 4.D4 3.B2
NoteE 6<M strongly disagreeG <M strongly agree
Confidence le+el of B@J
A4
a!le ,.': Shopping preference contri!uted !& .er& !ad performance
N Min Max 7o&er Mean ,pper %td. De+
NE/4 <23 6< 2 64.@B 64.?B 64.<D 3.B@
NE/2 <23 6< 2 64.A3 64.@4 64.?4 3.D<
NE/< <23 6< 2 64.DD 64.CB 64.AB 3.DD
NE/? <23 6< 3 62.AA 62.@B 62.@2 3.A?
NE/@ <23 6< 4 62.<@ 62.2A 62.4C 3.D3
NE/A <23 6< 4 62.4D 62.3B 62.33 3.D<
NE/C <23 6< 2 64.C2 64.A4 64.@4 3.B?
NE/D <23 6< 2 63.B< 63.CB 63.AA 4.24
NE/B <23 6< 2 64.<C 64.2C 64.4A 3.B@
NE/43 <23 6< 3 64.CD 64.AB 64.A4 3.C@
NE/44 <23 6< 4 64.CD 64.C3 64.A4 3.CB
NE/42 <23 6< 4 64.C@ 64.AC 64.@D 3.CB
NE/4< <23 6< 3 62.A4 62.@< 62.?A 3.AD
NE/4? <23 6< 3 62.43 62.32 64.B< 3.C@
NE/4@ <23 6< 3 64.BB 64.B4 64.D2 3.C@
NE/4A <23 6< 3 64.DD 64.D3 64.C2 3.CC
NE/4C <23 6< 2 63.@B 63.?@ 63.<3 4.<?
NE/4D <23 6< 4 64.D? 64.CC 64.AB 3.C3
NE/4B <23 6< 3 62.2< 62.4@ 62.3C 3.C2
NE/23 <23 6< 3 62.32 64.B? 64.DA 3.C?
NE/24 <23 6< 4 64.D2 64.C4 64.A3 4.34
NE/22 <23 6< 2 64.2? 64.3D 63.B< 4.<B
NE/2< <23 6< 4 64.D2 64.C< 64.A@ 3.CD
NoteE 6<M strongly disagreeG <M strongly agree
Confidence le+el of B@J
A2
a!le ,.): Current attri!utesB performance
N Min Max 7o&er Mean ,pper %td. De+
*E54 <32 62 < 3.D@ 3.BD 4.42 4.23
*E52 <32 62 < 3.DD 4.33 4.42 4.3@
*E5< <32 6< < 3.BC 4.43 4.22 4.44
*E5? <32 64 < 4.A? 4.CA 4.DD 4.3A
*E5@ <32 62 < 4.BA 2.3D 2.24 4.42
*E5A <32 6< < 4.BC 2.3B 2.24 4.3C
*E5C <32 6< < 4.32 4.4D 4.<< 4.<A
*E5D <32 6< < 3.<A 3.@4 3.AC 4.<B
*E5B <32 6< < 4.2A 4.<D 4.@4 4.43
*E543 <32 62 < 4.2D 4.?3 4.@2 4.3<
*E544 <32 62 < 4.22 4.<? 4.?A 4.3C
*E542 <32 64 < 4.<2 4.?< 4.@? 3.BA
*E54< <32 62 < 4.A2 4.C@ 4.DC 4.4@
*E54? <32 64 < 4.?? 4.@A 4.AC 4.3?
*E54@ <32 6< < 4.?@ 4.@D 4.C4 4.4<
*E54A <32 62 < 4.?@ 4.@C 4.AD 4.3<
*E54C <32 62 < 3.CB 3.B4 4.3< 4.3@
*E54D <32 62 < 4.2A 4.<C 4.?B 4.34
*E54B <32 62 < 4.@A 4.AC 4.CC 3.B?
*E523 <32 62 < 4.<? 4.?? 4.@@ 3.B2
*E524 <32 6< < 3.42 3.2@ 3.<D 4.4A
*E522 <32 62 < 3.@? 3.AC 3.D3 4.4@
*E52< <32 62 < 4.2? 4.<? 4.?@ 3.B@
NoteE 6<M strongly disagreeG <M strongly agree
Confidence le+el of B@J
A<
a!le ,.+: Shopping preference contri!uted !& current attri!utesB performance
N Min Max 7o&er Mean ,pper %td. De+
*5E4 <32 6< < 3.4< 3.2B 3.?@ 4.<B
*5E2 <32 62 < 63.<@ 63.24 63.3C 4.2?
*5E< <32 6< < 63.22 63.3D 3.3C 4.2A
*5E? <32 6< < 4.2< 4.<B 4.@@ 4.?2
*5E@ <32 6< < 4.?A 4.A2 4.CD 4.?@
*5EA <32 6< < 4.?A 4.A2 4.CD 4.?<
*5EC <32 62 < 3.<A 3.@< 3.AB 4.?@
*5ED <32 6< < 63.@4 63.<@ 63.4B 4.??
*5EB <32 6< < 3.?C 3.A2 3.CC 4.<2
*5E43 <32 62 < 3.CA 3.DB 4.3< 4.4D
*5E44 <32 62 < 3.?A 3.A4 3.C@ 4.2D
*5E42 <32 62 < 3.@< 3.AD 3.D< 4.<2
*5E4< <32 62 < 4.2C 4.?< 4.@B 4.?4
*5E4? <32 62 < 3.BC 4.42 4.2C 4.<?
*5E4@ <32 62 < 4.3A 4.24 4.<@ 4.<4
*5E4A <32 62 < 4.3C 4.24 4.<@ 4.2C
*5E4C <32 6< < 63.4C 63.32 3.42 4.2A
*5E4D <32 62 < 3.AD 3.D4 3.B@ 4.4A
*5E4B <32 62 < 4.4@ 4.2D 4.?2 4.4A
*5E23 <32 62 < 3.DA 3.BB 4.44 4.42
*5E24 <32 6< < 3.4B 3.<< 3.?D 4.2C
*5E22 <32 6< < 63.32 3.4? 3.2B 4.<C
*5E2< <32 6< < 4.3C 4.4B 4.<3 4.3<
NoteE 6<M strongly disagreeG <M strongly agree
Confidence le+el of B@J
A?
a!le ,.-: ,ifference !etween current attri!utesB performance and .er& good performance
Attribute t df %ig. 7o&er Mean ,pper
!26tailed"
4 62B.4@ <34 3.333 62.4@ 62.32 64.DD
2 6<2.BB <34 3.333 62.42 62.33 64.DD
< 62B.C@ <34 3.333 62.3< 64.B3 64.CD
? 623.2@ <34 3.333 64.<A 64.2? 64.42
@ 64?.2D <34 3.333 64.3? 63.B2 63.CB
A 64?.B3 <34 3.333 64.3< 63.B4 63.CB
C 62<.2? <34 3.333 64.BD 64.D2 64.AC
D 6<4.4@ <34 3.333 62.A? 62.?B 62.<<
B 62@.A< <34 3.333 64.C? 64.A2 64.?B
43 62C.32 <34 3.333 64.C2 64.A3 64.?D
44 62C.3@ <34 3.333 64.CD 64.AA 64.@?
42 62D.24 <34 3.333 64.AD 64.@C 64.?A
4< 64B.3< <34 3.333 64.<D 64.2@ 64.4<
4? 62?.2? <34 3.333 64.@A 64.?? 64.<<
4@ 624.DC <34 3.333 64.@@ 64.?2 64.2B
4A 62?.4A <34 3.333 64.@@ 64.?< 64.<2
4C 6<?.?? <34 3.333 62.24 62.3B 64.BC
4D 62C.B3 <34 3.333 64.C? 64.A< 64.@4
4B 62?.D3 <34 3.333 64.?? 64.<< 64.2<
23 62B.<3 <34 3.333 64.AA 64.@A 64.?@
24 6?4.2D <34 3.333 62.DD 62.C@ 62.A2
22 6<@.<4 <34 3.333 62.?A 62.<< 62.23
2< 6<3.4@ <34 3.333 64.CA 64.AA 64.@@
NoteE Confidence le+el of B@J
A@
a!le ,.<: ,ifference !etween current attri!utesB performance and .er& !ad performance
Attribute t df %ig. 7o&er Mean ,pper
!26tailed"
4 @C.@B <34 3.333 <.BD <.D@ ?.42
2 A@.BB <34 3.333 ?.33 <.DD ?.42
< A?.34 <34 3.333 ?.43 <.BC ?.22
? CD.44 <34 3.333 ?.CA ?.A? ?.DD
@ CB.4? <34 3.333 @.3D ?.BA @.24
A D2.B@ <34 3.333 @.3B ?.BC @.24
C @<.<2 <34 3.333 ?.4D ?.32 ?.<<
D ??.33 <34 3.333 <.@4 <.<A <.AC
B AB.@< <34 3.333 ?.<D ?.2A ?.@4
43 C?.<? <34 3.333 ?.?3 ?.2D ?.@2
44 C3.CB <34 3.333 ?.<? ?.22 ?.?A
42 CB.DA <34 3.333 ?.?< ?.<2 ?.@?
4< C4.B@ <34 3.333 ?.C@ ?.A2 ?.DC
4? CA.?B <34 3.333 ?.@A ?.?? ?.AC
4@ C3.@3 <34 3.333 ?.@D ?.?@ ?.C4
4A CA.B? <34 3.333 ?.@C ?.?@ ?.AD
4C A?.?A <34 3.333 <.B4 <.CB ?.3<
4D C@.3A <34 3.333 ?.<C ?.2A ?.?B
4B DA.C3 <34 3.333 ?.AC ?.@A ?.CC
23 D<.A@ <34 3.333 ?.?? ?.<? ?.@@
24 ?D.D? <34 3.333 <.2@ <.42 <.<D
22 @@.?@ <34 3.333 <.AC <.@? <.D3
2< CB.43 <34 3.333 ?.<? ?.2? ?.?@
NoteE Confidence le+el of B@J
AA
a!le ,.=: ,ifference !etween shopping preference contri!uted !& .er& good performance
and shopping preference contri!uted !& current performance
7e+eneFs -est for
Equality of
)ariances t6test for Equality of Means
Attribute # %ig. t df %ig. 7o&er Mean ,pper
!26tailed"
4 @D.A3 3.333 4@.2< A23 3.333 4.<3 4.@3 4.AB
2 B<.DB 3.333 2<.C3 A23 3.333 4.D3 4.BA 2.42
< DA.C4 3.333 2<.B2 A23 3.333 4.D? 2.33 2.4C
? 2D@.33 3.333 4@.<A A23 3.333 4.4@ 4.<2 4.?B
@ 2?<.A2 3.333 43.3? A23 3.333 3.C4 3.DD 4.3A
A 4DD.A? 3.333 C.D3 A23 3.333 3.@< 3.C4 3.DD
C B?.<D 3.333 4<.A3 A23 3.333 4.4? 4.<< 4.@2
D ?4.23 3.333 4<.34 A23 3.333 4.4@ 4.<@ 4.@A
B 2B.B< 3.333 C.CA A23 3.333 3.@? 3.C2 3.B4
43 DD.B@ 3.333 44.A< A23 3.333 3.C@ 3.B3 4.3A
44 4DB.@? 3.333 4@.4C A23 3.333 4.3D 4.2? 4.?3
42 AC.4< 3.333 B.32 A23 3.333 3.A< 3.D4 3.BD
4< 4@B.2C 3.333 44.@? A23 3.333 3.DA 4.3? 4.24
4? 44D.A3 3.333 43.34 A23 3.333 3.C4 3.DD 4.3A
4@ 4CD.42 3.333 B.@A A23 3.333 3.A< 3.D3 3.BA
4A D4.AA 3.333 C.@C A23 3.333 3.?C 3.A? 3.D3
4C ?.C? 3.3<3 A.?< A23 3.333 3.?@ 3.A@ 3.D@
4D BD.2? 3.333 4?.B4 A23 3.333 4.33 4.4@ 4.<3
4B <C.@C 3.333 A.B3 A23 3.333 3.?4 3.@C 3.C?
23 23.3? 3.333 43.4? A23 3.333 3.AA 3.D2 3.BC
24 2@.4C 3.333 4@.3D A23 3.333 4.23 4.<D 4.@A
22S 4.2C 3.2A4 43.@@ A43 3.333 3.B4 4.42 4.<<
2< B.BB 3.332 A.A< A23 3.333 3.<A 3.@2 3.AC
NoteE Confidence le+el of B@J
SE ,sing t6test for unequal +ariance samples
AC
a!le ,.?: ,ifference !etween shopping preference contri!uted !& current performance
and shopping preference contri!uted !& .er& !ad performance
7e+eneFs -est for
Equality of
)ariances
t6test for Equality of
Means
Attribute # %ig. t df %ig. 7o&er Mean ,pper
!26tailed"
4 DB.<B 3.333 4D.C4 A23 3.333 4.@B 4.CD 4.BA
2 C3.BA 3.333 4@.?2 A23 3.333 4.4< 4.<3 4.?A
< ??.D4 3.333 4B.AC A23 3.333 4.@? 4.C4 4.DD
? 24?.A? 3.333 ?@.?D A23 3.333 <.D4 <.BD ?.4A
@ 4<D.CD 3.333 ?4.CB A23 3.333 <.C3 <.DD ?.3A
A 4?<.B3 3.333 <B.C2 A23 3.333 <.@< <.C4 <.DB
C DA.<< 3.333 24.B2 A23 3.333 4.B@ 2.4? 2.<<
D 23.33 3.333 ?.4A A23 3.333 3.2< 3.?? 3.A@
B ?C.4? 3.333 23.@@ A23 3.333 4.C4 4.DB 2.3C
43 @A.B4 3.333 <2.C2 A23 3.333 2.?< 2.@B 2.C?
44 44B.DB 3.333 2C.2A A23 3.333 2.4? 2.<4 2.?C
42 BD.BC 3.333 2A.BB A23 3.333 2.4D 2.<@ 2.@2
4< 232.2< 3.333 ?@.3A A23 3.333 <.CB <.BA ?.4?
4? 4<A.3< 3.333 <A.2? A23 3.333 2.BA <.4< <.<3
4@ 422.<4 3.333 <A.@B A23 3.333 2.B? <.44 <.2D
4A D?.B3 3.333 <A.3@ A23 3.333 2.D? <.34 <.4C
4C C.CA 3.33A ?.3@ A23 3.333 3.22 3.?2 3.A<
4D C?.24 3.333 <<.D4 A23 3.333 2.?< 2.@D 2.C<
4B AC.?4 3.333 ??.@D A23 3.333 <.2B <.?? <.@B
23 <?.B4 3.333 <D.A4 A23 3.333 2.CD 2.B2 <.3C
24 4<.3< 3.333 22.4@ A23 3.333 4.DA 2.3? 2.22
22S 3.C3 3.?3< 44.3@ A4D 3.333 4.34 4.22 4.??
2< 4B.4? 3.333 ?3.4@ A23 3.333 2.CD 2.B2 <.3C
NoteE Confidence le+el of B@J
SE ,sing t6test for unequal +ariance samples
AD
a!le ,.10: 6ttri!utesB characteristics
Attribute *erformance
%hopping
preference *oints
*reference
gap
1mpro+ement
efficiency
4 6<.33 64.?B Negati+e 4.@3 3.C?
3.BD 3.2B Current
<.33 4.CD *ositi+e
2 6<.33 64.@4 Negati+e 4.BA 3.BD
4.33 63.24 Current
<.33 4.C@ *ositi+e
< 6<.33 64.CB Negati+e 2.33 4.3@
4.43 63.3D Current
<.33 4.B< *ositi+e
? 6<.33 62.@B Negati+e 4.<2 4.3C
4.CA 4.<B Current
<.33 2.C4 *ositi+e
@ 6<.33 62.2A Negati+e 3.DD 3.BA
2.3D 4.A2 Current
<.33 2.@3 *ositi+e
A 6<.33 62.3B Negati+e 3.C4 3.CC
2.3B 4.A2 Current
<.33 2.<< *ositi+e
C 6<.33 64.A4 Negati+e 4.<< 3.C<
4.4D 3.@< Current
<.33 4.DA *ositi+e
D 6<.33 63.CB Negati+e 4.<@ 3.@?
3.@4 63.<@ Current
<.33 4.33 *ositi+e
B 6<.33 64.2C Negati+e 3.C2 3.?@
4.<D 3.A2 Current
<.33 4.<@ *ositi+e
43 6<.33 64.AB Negati+e 3.B3 3.@A
4.?3 3.DB Current
<.33 4.D3 *ositi+e
44 6<.33 64.C3 Negati+e 4.2? 3.C@
4.<? 3.A4 Current
AB
<.33 4.D@ *ositi+e
42 6<.33 64.AC Negati+e 3.D4 3.@4
4.?< 3.AD Current
<.33 4.?B *ositi+e
4< 6<.33 62.@< Negati+e 4.3? 3.D<
4.C@ 4.?< Current
<.33 2.?C *ositi+e
4? 6<.33 62.32 Negati+e 3.DD 3.A4
4.@A 4.42 Current
<.33 2.33 *ositi+e
4@ 6<.33 64.B4 Negati+e 3.D3 3.@A
4.@D 4.24 Current
<.33 2.33 *ositi+e
4A 6<.33 64.D3 Negati+e 3.A? 3.?@
4.@C 4.24 Current
<.33 4.D@ *ositi+e
4C 6<.33 63.?@ Negati+e 3.A@ 3.<4
3.B4 63.32 Current
<.33 3.A< *ositi+e
4D 6<.33 64.CC Negati+e 4.4@ 3.C4
4.<C 3.D4 Current
<.33 4.BA *ositi+e
4B 6<.33 62.4@ Negati+e 3.@C 3.?<
4.AC 4.2D Current
<.33 4.DA *ositi+e
23 6<.33 64.B? Negati+e 3.D2 3.@2
4.?? 3.BB Current
<.33 4.D3 *ositi+e
24 6<.33 64.C4 Negati+e 4.<D 3.@3
3.2@ 3.<< Current
<.33 4.C4 *ositi+e
22 6<.33 64.3D Negati+e 4.42 3.?D
3.AC 3.4? Current
<.33 4.2A *ositi+e
2< 6<.33 64.C< Negati+e 3.@2 3.<4
C3
4.<? 4.4B Current
<.33 4.C4 *ositi+e
NoteE 6<M strongly disagreeG <M strongly agree
a!le ,.11: #ist of attri!utes in the order of preference gap
*reference gap
Attribute Mean %t. De+
< 2.33 3.3D
2 4.BA 3.3D
4 4.@3 3.43
24 4.<D 3.3B
D 4.<@ 3.43
C 4.<< 3.43
? 4.<2 3.3B
44 4.2? 3.3D
4D 4.4@ 3.3D
22 4.42 3.44
4< 4.3? 3.3B
43 3.B3 3.3D
@ 3.DD 3.3B
4? 3.DD 3.3B
23 3.D2 3.3D
42 3.D4 3.3B
4@ 3.D3 3.3D
B 3.C2 3.3B
A 3.C4 3.3B
4C 3.A@ 3.43
4A 3.A? 3.3D
4B 3.@C 3.3D
2< 3.@2 3.3D
C4
a!le ,.12: #ist of attri!utes in the order of impro.ement efficienc&
Attribute 1mpro+ement efficiency
? 4.3C
< 4.3@
2 3.BD
@ 3.BA
4< 3.D<
A 3.CC
44 3.C@
4 3.C?
C 3.C<
4D 3.C4
4? 3.A4
43 3.@A
4@ 3.@A
D 3.@?
23 3.@2
42 3.@4
24 3.@3
22 3.?D
B 3.?@
4A 3.?@
4B 3.?<
2< 3.<4
4C 3.<4
C2
a!le ,.1': Pair test for difference in impro.ement efficienc&
*airs of %imulation
attributes Difference %ignificant
4642 3.22CCDC@D 3.33
?6@ 3.43<CBC?@ 3.2?
@6A 3.4B4A4C3? 3.42
C643 3.4A@A@<? 3.32
<62 3.3C<<D34@ 3.4C
264D 3.2C<2?@@C 3.33
4D64? 3.3B<D32CA 3.4?
4?64@ 3.3@3A4@DA 3.<3
2364A 3.3CB<BAA2 3.4C
4<624 3.<2?C2424 3.33
2264C 3.4C434B2A 3.34
NoteE -ested by 43.333 Monte Carlo simulations. confidence le+el of inputs is B@J
C<
APPENDIC E: QUALITY ATTRIBUTES OF A SUPERMARKET
G#n#+,"
4. Are the open hours con+enient for youP
2. 1s the store location con+enient for youP
P,+k(n%
A
<. 1s the par(ing area monitored by security guardsP
?. Do the staffs help you in par(ingP
@. Do they ser+e you &ith smileP
A. 1s the arrangement appropriateP
C. Do you &ait &hen you ta(e your +ehicle in0out the par(ingP
D. 1s it easy to go to the super mar(et from the par(ingP
B. 1s the par(ing fee expensi+eP
43. 1s there adequately par(ing. e+en for the hot timeP
W#"c&#
A
44. Are there enough entries to go into the super mar(etP
42. Are the &atchmen &illing to guideP
4<. Are there enough loc(ersP
4?. 1s the loc(er large enoughP
4@. 1s the loc(er safeP
4A. 1s the loc(er near the entriesP
4C. Do the staffs ser+e you &ith a smileP
4D. Do you &ait &hen you ta(e your bag in0out the loc(erP
4B. Are there the shopping trolleys0bas(etsP
23. 1s there the layout mapP
L,6.'
A
24. Are the stalls arranged suitableP
22. 1s it easy to find the goodsP
2<. 1s it easy to ta(e the goodsP
2?. Are the goods arranged attracti+elyP
2@. Are the staffs &illing to guideP
2A. 1s their information helpfulP
2C. $hat do they do &hen you are confusedP
2D. 1s the spacing !bet&een the stalls" large enoughP
2B. 1s the floor cleanP
<3. 1s there enough lightP
<4. Ho& is the atmosphere of the super mar(etP
<2. 1s the price posted clearlyP
A
%ourceE Nga. H.D.N.. -hanh. -.D.. and Hanh. -.M.. 9ualit& of Co-op "art Cong 9u&nh. 2333. %&iss6A1-6
)ietnam Management De+elopment *rogramme !%A)". )iet Nam.
C?
G$* E(n *#"--*#+/(c# ,+#, n"6F
A
<<. Do the supermar(et offer a &ide range of categories of goodsP
<?. Are goods are a+ailability
<@. Are models of goods good loo(ingP
<A. Ho& reasonable are the goods prices comparing &ith othersP
<C. Do the goods ha+e clear originP
<D. Do you belie+e in quality of goods
<B. Ho& often they introduce ne& goodsP
?3. Do they ha+e some special goodsP
?4. Do the staffs introduce the specification of the goods to youP
?2. Do the staffs introduce the appropriate goods to youP
?<. Do the staffs ser+e you &ith a smileP
??. Ha+e you e+er seen an out6of6date product in this placeP
?@. Are the goods maintained in the right conditionP
B(""(n%
A
?A. Are there enough countersP
?C. Do the staffs ser+e you &ith a smileP
?D. Are billing staffs trained on equipmentP
?B. 1s the billing belie+ableP
P*' *011(n%
A
@3. 1s it acceptable to return goodsP
@4. Ho& do they guarantee productsP
@2. Do you (no& &here to complainP
@<. 1s your complaint responsi+ely resol+edP
@?. Are their solutions satisfiedP
@@. Do they offer con+enient facilities to ma(e a complaint !phone line. mail box"P
@A. Do the staffs ser+e you &ith a smileP
S,"#* P+&'(n
A
@C. Do they ha+e sales promotion campaignP
@D. Ho& about their credibilityP
@B. Ho& effecti+e are the media using in sales promotionP
A3. Do they ha+e something especially cheaper than others doP
A4. Do the staffs explain clearly to you about their campaignP
A2. Do the staffs ser+e you &ith a smileP
C@
REFERENCES
4. Noria(i ano. 8uide to 9" in Ser.ice 5ndustries. 4BBA. Asian *roducti+ity
=rgani'ation. -o(yo.
2. Asho( 5ao. 7a&rence *. Carr. 1smael Dambolena. 5obert H. opp. Hohn Martin.
#arshad 5afii. *hyllis #ineman %chlesinger. otal 9ualit& "anagement: 6 Cross
Functional Perspecti.e. 4BBA. Hohn $iley K %ons. 1nc.. ,.%.A.
<. Neil Bruce Holbert and Mar( $. %peece. Practical "arketing Research C 6n
5ntegrated 8lo!al Perspecti.e. 4BB<. *rentice Hall. %ingapore.
?. Eugene $. Anderson. Claes #ornell. and Donald 5. 7ehmann. 9Customer
%atisfaction. Mar(et %hare. and *rofitabilityE #indings #rom %&eden:. Dournal of
"arketing. )ol. @D !Huly 4BB?". p.@<6AA.
@. $illiam 7. $il(ie and Edgar A. *essemier. 91ssues in Mar(eting8s ,se of Multi6
Attribute Attitude Models:. Dournal of "arketing Research. )ol. N !No+ember
4BC<". p.?2D6??4.
A. N.N. %hen. .C. -an. and M. Nie. 9An 1ntegrated Approach to 1nno+ati+e *roduct
De+elopment ,sing ano8s Model and ;#D:. European Dournal of 5nno.ation
"anagement. )olume <. Number 2. 2333. MCB ,ni+ersity *ress. p. B46BB.
C. *arasuraman. A.. )alarie Oeithaml. and 7eonard Berry. 9A Conceptual Model of
%er+ice ;uality and 1ts 1mplications for #uture 5esearch:. Dournal of "arketing. ?B
!#all". 4BD@. p.?46@3.
D. *arasuraman. A.. 7eonard Berry. and )alarie Oeithaml. 9%er+qualE A Multiple61tem
%cale for Measuring Customer *erceptions of %er+ice ;uality:. Dournal of
Retailing. A?. 4!4BDD". p.426?3.
B. *arasuraman. A.. 7eonard Berry. and )alarie Oeithaml. 95efinement and
5eassessment of the %er+qual %cale:. Dournal of Retailing. AC !$inter 4BB4".
p.?236?@3.
43. Carmines. E. /.. and Oeller. 5. A.. 95eliability and )alidity Assessment:. Sage
Pu!lications. %eries Number 3C634C. 4BCB. Ne&bury *ar(. %age *ublications. 1nc.
44. Cronin. H. H.. -aylor. %. A.. 9Measuring %er+ice ;ualityE A 5eexamination and
Extension:. Dournal of "arketing. )ol. @A !Huly 4BB2". p.@@6AD.
42. -eas. 5. .. 9Expectation. *erformance E+aluation. and Consumers8 *erception of
;uality:. Dournal of "arketing. )ol. @C !=ctober 4BB<". p.4D6<?.
4<. *ea(. H.%.. Supermarket: merchandising $ management. 4BCC. *rentice Hall. Ne&
Hersey.
4?. 7e&ison. D.M.. Retailing. #ifth edition. 4BB?. Macmillan. Ne& Lor(.
4@. Char+ar. #.H.. Supermarketing. 4BA4. Macmillan. 7ondon.
CA
4A. McCleland. $./.. Studies in Retailing. 4BA<. Blac(&ell. =xford.
4C. halifa =thman. Patterns of Supermarket >se in "ala&sia. 4BB3. !1n #indlay. A.
M.. *addition. 5.. and Da&son. -.A.. Retailing En.ironments in ,e.eloping
Countries. p.23@6244<. 4BB3."
4D. 7uc -hi -hu Huong. 6ssessment he #ong-erm :ia!ilit& of Supermarkets: 6
Customer Sur.e& in %anoi. 4BBC. Asian 1nstitute of -echnology. Bang(o(.
-hailand.
4B. -u /iang. 9Di Mua %am o %ieu -hi:. ,au u. 4404404BBB. )iet Nam. p.4@.
23. Chanh hai. 9%ieu -hi -ro Minh:. hoi 7ao 3inh e Sai 8on. 4D03402334. )ol. ?6
2334 !@2@". )iet Nam. p.44642.
CC