Fall 2022 End-of-Semester Exam Solutions for Data Analysis- Statistics, Brown University
Exam Question 1: What is the current level of customer satisfaction and patronage with the various aspects of Tribeca Grill?
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Very unsatisfied | 5 |
2.0 |
2.5 |
2.5 |
Unsatisfied | 1 |
.4 |
.5 |
3.0 |
|
Neutral | 38 |
15.5 |
19.3 |
22.3 |
|
Satisfied | 91 |
37.1 |
46.2 |
68.5 |
|
Very satisfied | 62 |
25.3 |
31.5 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 197 |
80.4 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 48 |
19.6 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
Out of 245 respondents, data about overall satisfaction rating is given by only 197 respondents. The majority of the respondents respond being satisfied (91 respondents) or being very satisfied (62 respondents). 80.7% of respondents are satisfied or very satisfied with the overall experience. Only 3% of respondents were very unsatisfied or unsatisfied with their experience at Tribeca Grill.
Q6 Rate Food taste
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Neutral | 14 |
5.7 |
7.1 |
7.1 |
Satisfied | 75 |
30.6 |
38.1 |
45.2 |
|
Very satisfied | 108 |
44.1 |
54.8 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 197 |
80.4 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 48 |
19.6 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
Out of 245 respondents, data about food rating is given by only 197 respondents. The majority of the respondents respond being satisfied (75 respondents) or being very satisfied (108 respondents). Only 7.1% of respondents rated their food taste experience as neutral at Tribeca Grill.
Q6 Rate Level of service
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Very unsatisfied | 9 |
3.7 |
4.6 |
4.6 |
Unsatisfied | 15 |
6.1 |
7.6 |
12.2 |
|
Neutral | 41 |
16.7 |
20.8 |
33.0 |
|
Satisfied | 71 |
29.0 |
36.0 |
69.0 |
|
Very satisfied | 61 |
24.9 |
31.0 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 197 |
80.4 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 48 |
19.6 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
From the 197 valid responses, 67% described themselves as satisfied or very satisfied with the level of customer service at Tribeca Grill.
Q6 Rate Interior appearance
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Very unsatisfied | 11 |
4.5 |
5.6 |
5.6 |
Unsatisfied | 26 |
10.6 |
13.2 |
18.8 |
|
Neutral | 58 |
23.7 |
29.4 |
48.2 |
|
Satisfied | 91 |
37.1 |
46.2 |
94.4 |
|
Very satisfied | 11 |
4.5 |
5.6 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 197 |
80.4 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 48 |
19.6 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
From the 197 valid responses, 51.8% described themselves as satisfied or very satisfied with the interior appearance at Tribeca Grill.
Q6 Rate Exterior appearance
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Very unsatisfied | 6 |
2.4 |
3.0 |
3.0 |
Unsatisfied | 32 |
13.1 |
16.2 |
19.3 |
|
Neutral | 68 |
27.8 |
34.5 |
53.8 |
|
Satisfied | 87 |
35.5 |
44.2 |
98.0 |
|
Very satisfied | 4 |
1.6 |
2.0 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 197 |
80.4 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 48 |
19.6 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
From the 197 valid responses, 46.2% described themselves as satisfied or very satisfied with the exterior appearance at Tribeca Grill.
Therefore, the metrics on which Tribeca Grill lacks right now, is the exterior appearance, as less than a majority of the respondents rated them to be satisfactory or very satisfactory.
Exam Question 1b : Request frequency of patronage of Tribeca Grill
Exam Solution 1b :
Descriptive Statistics
|
N |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Q3 Number of noon (lunch) meals eaten in last 3 months. | 197 |
0 |
25 |
4.97 |
4.445 |
Q3 Number of evening (dinner) meals eaten last 3 months | 196 |
0 |
20 |
4.37 |
3.440 |
Valid N (listwise) | 196 |
|
|
|
A respondent has had an average of 4.97 lunch meals and 4.37 dinner meals at Tribeca Grill in the last 3 months
Exam Question 1c : Solicit likes and dislikes with Tribeca Grill
Exam Solution 1c :
The following frequency table lists the disliked things about the restaurant
Q5 One thing you dislike about Tribeca Grill
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | |
61 |
24.9 |
24.9 |
24.9 |
appearance | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
25.7 |
|
Appearance | 3 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
26.9 |
|
Appearance of the building | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
27.8 |
|
bad location | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
28.2 |
|
bad service | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
28.6 |
|
Bathrooms are awful | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
29.0 |
|
building looks bad | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
29.4 |
|
Building needs remodeling | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
29.8 |
|
Building's appearance | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
30.6 |
|
Dirty inside and outside | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
31.0 |
|
Distance | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
31.8 |
|
everything is great | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
32.2 |
|
Everything is great | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
32.7 |
|
exterior appear |
1 |
.4 |
.4 |
33.1 |
|
Exterior is bad | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
33.9 |
|
Food is not always same | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
34.7 |
|
Food is not the best | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
35.1 |
|
Food Quantity | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
35.9 |
|
Horrible building | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
36.3 |
|
Horrible service | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
36.7 |
|
Inconsistent service | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
37.1 |
|
inside looks bad | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
38.0 |
|
Inside needs remodeling | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
38.4 |
|
interior needs remod | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
38.8 |
|
Interior needs work | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
39.2 |
|
Interror looks bad | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
39.6 |
|
Location | 9 |
3.7 |
3.7 |
43.3 |
|
Location | 11 |
4.5 |
4.5 |
47.8 |
|
More menu options | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
48.2 |
|
Need a salad bar | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
48.6 |
|
Need healthier options | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
49.4 |
|
Need Mexican food options | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
49.8 |
|
Need more menu options | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
50.2 |
|
Need more menu selections | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
50.6 |
|
need more options | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
51.0 |
|
Need more variety | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
51.8 |
|
Need some chips and dip | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
52.2 |
|
Need some nice desserts | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
52.7 |
|
Need to design a new menu | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
53.1 |
|
needs painting | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
53.5 |
|
Needs remodeling | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
53.9 |
|
no appetizers | 7 |
2.9 |
2.9 |
56.7 |
|
no kid's menu | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
57.1 |
|
no Mexican dishes | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
57.6 |
|
No pies for dessert | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
58.0 |
|
not always clea | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
58.8 |
|
nothing for kid | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
59.2 |
|
Nothing for kids | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
60.0 |
|
Old furniture | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
60.4 |
|
Parking | 9 |
3.7 |
3.7 |
64.1 |
|
Parking | 13 |
5.3 |
5.3 |
69.4 |
|
parking is bad sometimes | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
69.8 |
|
Poor menu options | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
70.6 |
|
poor service | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
71.0 |
|
Prices | 6 |
2.4 |
2.4 |
73.5 |
|
Prices too high | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
73.9 |
|
Rude waiters | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
74.3 |
|
Service | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
75.1 |
|
Service inconsistent | 3 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
76.3 |
|
Service is bad | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
76.7 |
|
Service is slow | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
77.6 |
|
service is too slow | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
78.0 |
|
Service slow | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
78.4 |
|
Service was horrible | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
78.8 |
|
Slow | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
79.2 |
|
Slow | 6 |
2.4 |
2.4 |
81.6 |
|
Slow at times | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
82.4 |
|
slow service | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
83.3 |
|
slow sometimes | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
83.7 |
|
Slow sometimes | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
84.5 |
|
Some of the waiters | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
85.3 |
|
Sometimes its too slow | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
86.1 |
|
Stuff for kids to eat | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
86.5 |
|
Takes too long to get food | 4 |
1.6 |
1.6 |
88.2 |
|
terrible service | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
88.6 |
|
Too few menu choice | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
89.0 |
|
Too much fried foods | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
89.4 |
|
too slow | 4 |
1.6 |
1.6 |
91.0 |
|
Too slow | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
91.8 |
|
Variety | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
92.7 |
|
Wait is too long | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
93.1 |
|
Wait staff person was rude | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
93.5 |
|
wait stafff is rude | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
93.9 |
|
wait time | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
94.3 |
|
Wait time | 10 |
4.1 |
4.1 |
98.4 |
|
waiting for foo | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
99.2 |
|
Waiting time | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
61 respondents had things that they disliked about Tribeca Grill. The two main gripes of customers were related to location (20 respondents mentioned it) and parking (23 respondents experienced problems with parking).
The following frequency table lists the liked things about the restaurant
Q4 One thing you like best about Tribeca Grill
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | |
58 |
23.7 |
23.7 |
23.7 |
atmosphere | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
24.1 |
|
Atmosphere | 6 |
2.4 |
2.4 |
26.5 |
|
attractive waitresses | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
26.9 |
|
Convenient | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
27.3 |
|
Food | 16 |
6.5 |
6.5 |
33.9 |
|
Food | 64 |
26.1 |
26.1 |
60.0 |
|
Food and location | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
60.4 |
|
food and service | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
60.8 |
|
Food and service is good | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
61.2 |
|
Food and waitresses | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
61.6 |
|
Food is fantastic | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
62.0 |
|
food is great | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
62.4 |
|
Food Taste | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
63.3 |
|
Food tastes good | 3 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
64.5 |
|
Friendly place | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
64.9 |
|
Good chicken fingers | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
65.3 |
|
Good food | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
65.7 |
|
Good hamburgers | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
66.1 |
|
Good value | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
66.5 |
|
good variety of food | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
66.9 |
|
great desserts | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
67.3 |
|
great food | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
67.8 |
|
Great food | 3 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
69.0 |
|
Great servcie | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
69.4 |
|
Great service | 6 |
2.4 |
2.4 |
71.8 |
|
Like the service | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
72.2 |
|
Like variety of food | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
72.7 |
|
Location | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
73.1 |
|
Location | 5 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
75.1 |
|
Love atmosphere | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
75.9 |
|
Menu options | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
76.3 |
|
Nice variety of food | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
76.7 |
|
Nothing | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
77.1 |
|
Owner | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
77.6 |
|
Owner is wonderful | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
78.0 |
|
People | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
78.4 |
|
People are nice | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
79.2 |
|
People who work there | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
79.6 |
|
Pretty waitresses | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
80.0 |
|
Prices | 9 |
3.7 |
3.7 |
83.7 |
|
Prices reasonable | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
84.1 |
|
Service | 7 |
2.9 |
2.9 |
86.9 |
|
Service | 23 |
9.4 |
9.4 |
96.3 |
|
Variety | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
96.7 |
|
Variety | 2 |
.8 |
.8 |
97.6 |
|
Waiters | 3 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
98.8 |
|
waitresses | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
99.2 |
|
Waitresses are great | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
99.6 |
|
waitstaff is great | 1 |
.4 |
.4 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 245 | 100.0 | 100.0 | |
Food and service were the most liked things about Tribeca Grill.
Exam Questions 2: Why have individuals not patronized Tribeca Grill?
2a : Determine reasons for not patronizing Tribeca Grill
Exam Solution :
Reasons for Not Eating at Tribeca Grill
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Location | 15 |
6.1 |
31.3 |
31.3 |
Physical Appearance | 3 |
1.2 |
6.3 |
37.5 |
|
Unaware | 19 |
7.8 |
39.6 |
77.1 |
|
Don't Eat Out | 2 |
.8 |
4.2 |
81.3 |
|
Bad Food | 6 |
2.4 |
12.5 |
93.8 |
|
Other | 3 |
1.2 |
6.3 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 48 |
19.6 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 197 |
80.4 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
There are 48 responses as to why the survey participants don’t eat at Tribeca Grill. The largest contributor to that, is consumer being unaware of the restaurant, followed by location, and bad food (12.5% of responses).
How far do you live from Tribeca Grill?
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 0-1 mile | 35 |
14.3 |
17.8 |
17.8 |
1-2 miles | 61 |
24.9 |
31.0 |
48.7 |
|
3-5 miles | 38 |
15.5 |
19.3 |
68.0 |
|
6-9 miles | 32 |
13.1 |
16.2 |
84.3 |
|
10-19 miles | 17 |
6.9 |
8.6 |
92.9 |
|
20+ miles | 14 |
5.7 |
7.1 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 197 |
80.4 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 48 |
19.6 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
Data shows that 68% of respondents live within 5 miles of the restaurant.
Exam Question 3: How has the addition of a new competitor down the street impacted Grill’s customer base?
Exam Solution 3a: Determine attitude toward new competitor in relation to Tribeca Grill
Q10 How has the opening of Fisherman's Paradise affected patronage of Tribeca Grill
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Quit eating at Lakeside Grill | 6 |
2.4 |
3.2 |
3.2 |
Eat less at Lakeside Grill | 42 |
17.1 |
22.3 |
25.5 |
|
Eat about the same at Lakeside Grill | 114 |
46.5 |
60.6 |
86.2 |
|
Eat more at Lakeside Grill | 26 |
10.6 |
13.8 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 188 |
76.7 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 57 |
23.3 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
The opening of the new restaurant has led to a small but significant shift away from dining at Tribeca Grill. There are 25.5% of respondents who have said that they would either quit eating at Tribeca or eat less than Tribeca after the opening of Fisherman’s Paradise, compared to 13.8% who informed that they would eat more at Tribeca Grill. However, the majority (60.6%) opine that they would eat about the same at Tribeca Grill.
Q9 Compared to Tribeca Grill, how would you rate Fisherman's Paradise?
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Much worse | 2 |
.8 |
1.1 |
1.1 |
Worse | 30 |
12.2 |
16.4 |
17.5 |
|
About same | 84 |
34.3 |
45.9 |
63.4 |
|
Better | 57 |
23.3 |
31.1 |
94.5 |
|
Much better | 10 |
4.1 |
5.5 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 183 |
74.7 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 62 |
25.3 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
Ratings wise, 45.9% rate Tribeca Grill and Fisherman’s Paradise the same, while 16.4% rate Fisherman’s Paradise to be worse or much worse than Tribeca Grill and 36.6% rate Fisherman’s Paradise to be better or much better than Tribeca Grill.
Therefore, more people rate Fisherman’s Paradise higher than Tribeca Grill, and more people are willing to dine less frequently at Tribeca Grill following the opening of Fisherman’s Paradise
Exam Question 3b: Determine if frequency of patronage of Tribeca Grill declined
Exam Solution:
Q10 How has the opening of Fisherman's Paradise affected patronage of Tribeca Grill
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Quit eating at Lakeside Grill | 6 |
2.4 |
3.2 |
3.2 |
Eat less at Lakeside Grill | 42 |
17.1 |
22.3 |
25.5 |
|
Eat about the same at Lakeside Grill | 114 |
46.5 |
60.6 |
86.2 |
|
Eat more at Lakeside Grill | 26 |
10.6 |
13.8 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 188 |
76.7 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 57 |
23.3 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
The opening of the new restaurant has led to a small but significant shift away from dining at Tribeca Grill. There are 25.5% of respondents who have said that they would either quit eating at Tribeca, or eat less than Tribeca after the opening of Fisherman’s Paradise, compared to 13.8% who informed that they would eat more at Tribeca Grill. However, the majority (60.6%) opine that they would eat about the same at Tribeca Grill.
Exam Question 4: Would changing Tribeca Grill’s menu, advertising, and/or promotional practice increase sales?
Exam Question 4a: Solicit attitude toward new menu items
Exam Solution
The dataset captures the response of the respondents to proposed changes in the menus such as introduction of mini-deserts, free bread before meal, half-portions of meals, introduction of healthier goods, kids’ menus, and lower prices & smaller portions.
Q11 Add new mini-deserts
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Not very important | 39 |
15.9 |
20.1 |
20.1 |
not important | 43 |
17.6 |
22.2 |
42.3 |
|
Neutral | 29 |
11.8 |
14.9 |
57.2 |
|
Important | 39 |
15.9 |
20.1 |
77.3 |
|
Very important | 44 |
18.0 |
22.7 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 194 |
79.2 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 51 |
20.8 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
42.8% of respondents regarded introduction of new mini-deserts as important or very important.
Q11 Add free bread before meal
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Not very important | 10 |
4.1 |
5.2 |
5.2 |
not important | 26 |
10.6 |
13.4 |
18.6 |
|
Neutral | 14 |
5.7 |
7.2 |
25.8 |
|
Important | 45 |
18.4 |
23.2 |
49.0 |
|
Very important | 99 |
40.4 |
51.0 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 194 |
79.2 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 51 |
20.8 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
74.2% of respondents regarded introduction of free bread before meal as important or very important.
Q11 Add half-portions of meals
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Not very important | 44 |
18.0 |
22.9 |
22.9 |
not important | 34 |
13.9 |
17.7 |
40.6 |
|
Neutral | 17 |
6.9 |
8.9 |
49.5 |
|
Important | 48 |
19.6 |
25.0 |
74.5 |
|
Very important | 49 |
20.0 |
25.5 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 192 |
78.4 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 53 |
21.6 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
50.5% of respondents regarded introduction of half-portion of meals as important or very important.
Q11 Add healthier foods
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Not very important | 14 |
5.7 |
7.2 |
7.2 |
not important | 24 |
9.8 |
12.3 |
19.5 |
|
Neutral | 19 |
7.8 |
9.7 |
29.2 |
|
Important | 56 |
22.9 |
28.7 |
57.9 |
|
Very important | 82 |
33.5 |
42.1 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 195 |
79.6 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 50 |
20.4 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
70.8% of respondents regarded introduction of healthier foods as important or very important.
Q11 Add kid's menus
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Not very important | 81 |
33.1 |
41.8 |
41.8 |
not important | 53 |
21.6 |
27.3 |
69.1 |
|
Neutral | 19 |
7.8 |
9.8 |
||
Important | 19 |
7.8 |
9.8 |
88.7 |
|
Very important | 22 |
9.0 |
11.3 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 194 |
79.2 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 51 |
20.8 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
21.1% of respondents regarded introduction of kids’ menus as important or very important.
From these analyses, we see that giving out free bread before meals, and addition of healthier menu items are the best ways to address any changes to menus, as a large majority of customers regard them as important or very important.
Exam Question 4b: Determine the impact of advertising on patronage decision
Exam Solution 4b:
Q12 Advertising on radio
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Not very important | 39 |
15.9 |
20.3 |
20.3 |
not important | 44 |
18.0 |
22.9 |
43.2 |
|
Neutral | 56 |
22.9 |
29.2 |
72.4 |
|
Important | 29 |
11.8 |
15.1 |
87.5 |
|
Very important | 24 |
9.8 |
12.5 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 192 |
78.4 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 53 |
21.6 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
Only 27.6% of respondents regard the radio as important or very important.
Q12 Advertising on TV
|
FREQUENCY | Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Not very important | 14 |
5.7 |
7.3 |
7.3 |
not important | 32 |
13.1 |
16.7 |
24.0 |
|
Neutral | 49 |
20.0 |
25.5 |
49.5 |
|
Important | 50 |
20.4 |
26.0 |
75.5 |
|
Very important | 47 |
19.2 |
24.5 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 192 |
78.4 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 53 |
21.6 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
50.5% of respondents regard the radio as important or very important.
Q12 Advertising in the newspaper
|
FREQUENCY
| Percent | Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Not very important | 70 |
28.6 |
36.6 |
36.6 |
not important | 44 |
18.0 |
23.0 |
59.7 |
|
Neutral | 44 |
18.0 |
23.0 |
82.7 |
|
Important | 17 |
6.9 |
8.9 |
91.6 |
|
Very important | 16 |
6.5 |
8.4 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 191 |
78.0 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 54 |
22.0 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
Of the total respondents, only 17.3% respondents regard newspaper ads as important or very important.
Therefore, of the 3 types of advertising media, only TV advertising was regarded by a majority of respondents as important or very important.
Exam Question 3c: Identify promotions that may influence patronage decisions
Exam Solution 3c :
Coupons, offering lower prices & smaller lunch portions and price off meals at various times were the different types of promotions proposed in the dataset.
Q11 Offer lower prices and smaller portions for lunch
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Not very important | 14 |
5.7 |
7.4 |
7.4 |
not important | 37 |
15.1 |
19.7 |
27.1 |
|
Neutral | 13 |
5.3 |
6.9 |
34.0 |
|
Important | 47 |
19.2 |
25.0 |
59.0 |
|
Very important | 77 |
31.4 |
41.0 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 188 |
76.7 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 57 |
23.3 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
66.0% of respondents regarded lowering of prices and introducing smaller portions for lunch as important or very important.
Q12 Coupons
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Not very important | 52 |
21.2 |
26.9 |
26.9 |
not important | 27 |
11.0 |
14.0 |
40.9 |
|
Neutral | 31 |
12.7 |
16.1 |
57.0 |
|
Important | 29 |
11.8 |
15.0 |
72.0 |
|
Very important | 54 |
22.0 |
28.0 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 193 |
78.8 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 52 |
21.2 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
43.0% of respondents regarded coupons as important or very important.
Q12 Price-off meals at various times
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Not very important | 9 |
3.7 |
4.6 |
4.6 |
not important | 5 |
2.0 |
2.6 |
7.2 |
|
Neutral | 14 |
5.7 |
7.2 |
14.4 |
|
Important | 50 |
20.4 |
25.6 |
40.0 |
|
Very important | 117 |
47.8 |
60.0 |
100.0 |
|
Total | 195 |
79.6 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing | System | 50 |
20.4 |
|
|
Total | 245 |
100.0 |
|
|
85.6% of respondents regard the price off meals at various times as important or very important.
Therefore, comparing the consumer attitudes towards the different types of promotions, we see that the price of meals at various times is the most effective way of promotion, followed by lowering of prices and introducing smaller portions for lunch.
__
Survey questions appear to be comprehensive as they cover various aspects of the consumer’s attitudes towards Tribeca Grill, the influence of Fisherman’s Paradise opening up, changes in menu items, various promotion campaigns and ad campaigns
Q7 to 10 appear to be good questions, as they measure the impact of Fisherman’s Paradise and its impact on Tribeca Grill.