FORE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT

Business Research Methods

Laxman Dhaba FORE Mess








Submitted By:
Group 5
Shuchi Singh 221141
Supriya Sharma 221153
Vaibhav Ahuja 221160
Vaibhav Gupta 221161
Vigneshwar Shankar 221166
Submitted to:

Prof. Alok Kumar
INTRODUCTION

Student's t-test
A t-test is any statistical hypothesis test in which the test
statistic follows a Student's t distribution if the null hypothesis is
supported. It can be used to determine if two sets of data are
significantly different from each other, and is most commonly applied
when the test statistic would follow a normal distribution if the value
of a scaling term in the test statistic were known. When the scaling
term is unknown and is replaced by an estimate based on the data, the
test statistic (under certain conditions) follows a
Student's t distribution.
History
The t-statistic was introduced in 1908 by William Sealy Gosset, a
chemist working for the Guinness brewery in Dublin,
Ireland ("Student" was his pen name).
[1][2][3][4]
Gosset had been hired
due to Claude Guinness's policy of recruiting the best graduates
from Oxford and Cambridge to apply biochemistry and statistics to
Guinness's industrial processes.
[2]
Gosset devised the t-test as a cheap
way to monitor the quality of stout.
The Student t-test work was submitted to and accepted in the
journal Biometrika, the journal that Karl Pearson had co-founded and
was the Editor-in-Chief; the article was published in 1908. Company
policy at Guinness forbade its chemists from publishing their
findings, so Gosset published his mathematical work under the
pseudonym "Student". Actually, Guinness had a policy of allowing
technical staff leave for study (so-called study leave), which Gosset
used during the first two terms of the 1906-1907 academic year in
Professor Karl Pearson's Biometric Laboratory at University College
London.
[5]
Gosset's identity was then known to fellow statisticians and
the Editor-in-Chief Karl Pearson. It is not clear how much of the work
Gosset performed while he was at Guinness and how much was done
when he was on study leave at University College London.
Uses
Among the most frequently used t-tests are:
A one-sample location test of whether the mean of a population
has a value specified in a null hypothesis.
A two-sample location test of the null hypothesis that the means of
two populations are equal. All such tests are usually
called Student's t-tests, though strictly speaking that name should
only be used if the variances of the two populations are also
assumed to be equal; the form of the test used when this
assumption is dropped is sometimes called Welch's t-test. These
tests are often referred to as "unpaired" or "independent
samples" t-tests, as they are typically applied when the statistical
units underlying the two samples being compared are non-
overlapping.
[6]

A test of the null hypothesis that the difference between two
responses measured on the same statistical unit has a mean value
of zero. For example, suppose we measure the size of a cancer
patient's tumor before and after a treatment. If the treatment is
effective, we expect the tumor size for many of the patients to be
smaller following the treatment. This is often referred to as the
"paired" or "repeated measures" t-test:
[6][7]
see paired difference
test.
A test of whether the slope of a regression
line differs significantly from 0.









PROBLEM/ PURPOSE OF STUDY

1. Using a paired sample t-test, identify the parameters on
which the dhaba food has an edge over the mess food. You may
use a 5 per cent level of significance.

2. Based on the results obtained, what are your
recommendations?


METHODOLOGY
This chapter outlines the various tools utilised to carry out the
required research.
2.1-Universe of Study
All the dhabhas in the world.
2.2- Locale of Study
This study has been limited to understanding the food quality at
Indian Dhabhas and the FORE Mess.
The locale of the study has been mainly the Qutab Institutional
Area,New Delhi.
2.3-Sampling Techniques
The research has been carried out with the help of a questionnaire
and responses of the employees have been analysed for deriving
conclusions regarding the effectiveness of communication.
2.4-Sample Size
Due to time constraints, the questionnaire has been floated .to the
frequent visitors of dhabhas and the FORE Mess.
2.5- Data Collection
The study was conducted by utilising information from both, primary
and secondary sources.
PRIMARY SOURCE
For the purpose of collecting information from the company an in
depth questionnaire was designed .It covered all the aspects of food
quality and the satisfaction derived thereof , as required for the
analysis. It comprised of both open end and closed end questions.
*(A copy of the questionnaire has been enclosed)
The questionnaire was floated to various frequent visitors of the
dhabhas and FORE Mess.
SECONDARY SOURCE
A wide array of journals, research papers, articles, and news reports
contributed as the secondary sources.. which aided in carrying out the
test.
2.6-Data Analysis
Data collected from the respondents have been codified and analysed
both qualitatively & quantitatively.
2.7-Field Experience
The research work for this project was initiated in February 2014.
The initial step was drafting a questionnaire covering all the aspects
required for the study. Framing open end questions and ensuring that
the responses are direct and precise was a daunting task in itself.
However,visiting the dhabas was exhaustive yet , an enriching
experience.



ANALYSIS

This chapter focuses majorly on in-depth analysis of the study carried
out.The previous chapters have been mainly introductory in nature:
Introduction to research plan, Methodology adopted Now the analysis
is being done on the basis of the data collected from primary and
secondary sources.

FOR PAIR 1:
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is no significant difference between the taste of the food of dhabhas and
FORE Mess.
ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS:
The dhaba food tastes better than FORE Mess food.
FOR PAIR 2:
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is no significant difference between the kind of variety in the food items
provided by both dhabhas and FORE Mess.
ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS:
The dhaba food has more variety than FORE Mess food.
FOR PAIR 3:
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is no significant difference between of cost dhabhas and FORE Mess.
ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS:
The dhaba food is less costlier than FORE Mess food.
FOR PAIR 4:
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is no significant difference between the quality of ingredients used by
dhabhas and FORE Mess.
ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS:
The dhaba uses better quality ingredients than FORE Mess food.
FOR PAIR 5:
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is no significant difference between the hygiene maintained by dhabhas
and FORE Mess.
ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS:
The dhaba maintains better hygiene than FORE Mess.
FOR PAIR 6:
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is no significant difference between the service provided by dhabhas and
FORE Mess.
ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS:
The dhaba service quality is better than FORE Mess food.
FOR PAIR 7:
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is no significant difference between the ambience of dhabhas and FORE
Mess
ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS:
The dhaba ambience is better than FORE Mess food.
FOR PAIR 8:
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is no significant difference between the nutritional value of the food of
dhabhas and FORE Mess.
ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS:
The dhaba food is more nutritious than FORE Mess food.
FOR PAIR 9:
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is no significant difference between the delivery time of dhabhas and
FORE Mess.
ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS:
The dhaba delievery time is faster than FORE Mess food.
FOR PAIR 10:
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is no significant difference between the opening time of dhabhas and
FORE Mess.
ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS:
The dhaba opens at a more convenient time than FORE mess .



RESPONSE TO QUESTIONNAIRE






DATA ENTERED IN SPSS


OUTPUT

Paired Samples Statistics
Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Pair 1
Food taste for mess 3.50 30 .682 .125
Food taste for dhaba 2.60 30 .894 .163
Pair 2
Food vareity for mess 3.07 30 .828 .151
Food vareity for dhaba 1.87 30 .681 .124
Pair 3
Food cost for mess 3.20 30 .610 .111
Food cost for dhaba 2.70 30 .794 .145
Pair 4
Quality of ingredients for mess 1.90 30 .759 .139
Quality of ingredients for dhaba 2.80 30 .714 .130
Pair 5
Hygine for mess 1.93 30 .691 .126
Hygine for dhaba 3.37 30 .490 .089
Pair 6
Service quality for mess 1.67 30 .606 .111
Service quality for dhaba 3.10 30 .607 .111
Pair 7
Ambience for mess 2.53 30 .776 .142
Ambience for dhaba 2.80 30 .551 .101
Pair 8
Food nuitrition for mess 1.53 30 .507 .093
Food nuitrition for dhaba 2.80 30 .551 .101
Pair 9
Food delivery time for mess 1.67 30 .479 .088
Food delivery time for dhaba 3.03 30 .414 .076
Pair 10
Opening Time for mess 3.43 30 .568 .104
Opening Time for dhaba 2.33 30 .606 .111







Paired Samples Correlations
N Correlation Sig.
Pair 1 Food taste for mess & Food taste for dhaba 30 -.170 .371
Pair 2
Food vareity for mess & Food vareity for
dhaba
30 -.106 .577
Pair 3 Food cost for mess & Food cost for dhaba 30 .057 .765
Pair 4
Quality of ingredients for mess & Quality of
ingredients for dhaba
30 .089 .640
Pair 5 Hygine for mess & Hygine for dhaba 30 -.027 .887
Pair 6
Service quality for mess & Service quality
for dhaba
30 .094 .623
Pair 7 Ambience for mess & Ambience for dhaba 30 .016 .933
Pair 8
Food nuitrition for mess & Food nuitrition
for dhaba
30 -.345 .062
Pair 9
Food delivery time for mess & Food
delivery time for dhaba
30 .058 .761
Pair 10
Opening Time for mess & Opening Time
for dhaba
30 .367 .046



Paired Samples Test
Paired Differences t df Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Pair
1
Food taste for
mess - Food taste
for dhaba
.900 1.213 .222 .447 1.353 4.062 29 .000
Pair
2
Food vareity for
mess - Food
vareity for dhaba
1.200 1.126 .206 .779 1.621 5.835 29 .000
Pair
3
Food cost for
mess - Food cost
for dhaba
.500 .974 .178 .136 .864 2.812 29 .009
Pair
4
Quality of
ingredients for
mess - Quality of
ingredients for
dhaba
-.900 .995 .182 -1.271 -.529 -4.955 29 .000
Pair
5
Hygine for mess -
Hygine for dhaba
-
1.433
.858 .157 -1.754 -1.113 -9.146 29 .000
Pair
6
Service quality for
mess - Service
quality for dhaba
-
1.433
.817 .149 -1.738 -1.128 -9.607 29 .000
Pair
7
Ambience for
mess - Ambience
for dhaba
-.267 .944 .172 -.619 .086 -1.547 29 .133
Pair
8
Food nuitrition for
mess - Food
nuitrition for
dhaba
-
1.267
.868 .159 -1.591 -.942 -7.990 29 .000
Pair
9
Food delivery
time for mess -
Food delivery
time for dhaba
-
1.367
.615 .112 -1.596 -1.137
-
12.17
3
29 .000
Pair
10
Opening Time for
mess - Opening
Time for dhaba
1.100 .662 .121 .853 1.347 9.104 29 .000
FINDINGS & CONCLUSION

FOR PAIR 1:
Since the output table states that t test is significant, thus we reject the null
hypothesis.
The taste of food of dhabhas is better than FORE Mess.
FOR PAIR 2:
Since the output table states that t test is significant, thus we reject the null
hypothesis.
Variety of food provided by dhabhas is more than FORE Mess.
FOR PAIR 3:
Since the output table states that t test is not significant, thus we do not reject
the null hypothesis.
There is no significant difference between cost of dhabhas and FORE Mess.

FOR PAIR 4:
Since the output table states that t test is significant, thus we reject the null
hypothesis.
The quality of ingredients used by dhabhas is better than FORE Mess.
FOR PAIR 5:
Since the output table states that t test is significant, thus we reject the null
hypothesis
Hygiene maintained by dhabhas is better.

FOR PAIR 6:
Since the output table states that t test is significant, thus we reject the null
hypothesis.
The service quality maintained by dhabhas is superior.

FOR PAIR 7:
Since the output table states that t test is not significant, thus we do not reject
the null hypothesis.
There is no significant difference between ambience. of dhabhas and FORE
Mess
.
FOR PAIR 8:
Since the output table states that t test is significant, thus we do reject the null
hypothesis
.Dhabha food is more nutritious.

FOR PAIR 9:
Since the output table states that t test is significant, thus we reject the null
hypothesis d.
Delivery time of dhabhas is quicker.

FOR PAIR 10:
Since the output table states that t test is significant, thus we reject the null
hypothesis
Opening time of dhabhas is more convenient.
RECOMMENDATIONS

As the test suggest ,following recommendations can be made:
1. Dhabas should work on improving the following:
Ambience
Quality of ingredients

2. FORE mess in order to satisy the customers needs to re-work a
lot especially the taste which is the most important factor.












Appendix:
BRM Questionnaire


"This is purely an academic exercise and all information provided including personal details
and views would be treated in strict confidence. The Survey is a part of our assignment /
FMG22 Section A/C. Purpose of the study is to identify the parameters on which the dhaba
food has an edge over the mess food."

1. Please rate the food taste?

1) Extremely Unsatisfied
2) Unsatisfied
3) Neutral
4) Satisfied
5) Extremely Satisfied

2. Please rate the food menu variety?

1) Extremely Unsatisfied
2) Unsatisfied
3) Neutral
4) Satisfied
5) Extremely Satisfied

3. Please rate the cost of food?

1) Extremely Unsatisfied
2) Unsatisfied
3) Neutral
4) Satisfied
5) Extremely Satisfied

4. Please rate the Quantity of ingredients in food?

1) Extremely Unsatisfied
2) Unsatisfied
3) Neutral
4) Satisfied
5) Extremely Satisfied

5. Please rate the Hygiene of the place?

1) Extremely Unsatisfied
2) Unsatisfied
3) Neutral
4) Satisfied
5) Extremely Satisfied

6. Please rate the Service Quality of the place?

1) Extremely Unsatisfied
2) Unsatisfied
3) Neutral
4) Satisfied
5) Extremely Satisfied

7. Please rate the Ambience of the place?

1) Extremely Unsatisfied
2) Unsatisfied
3) Neutral
4) Satisfied
5) Extremely Satisfied

8. Please rate the Nutrition of food?

1) Extremely Unsatisfied
2) Unsatisfied
3) Neutral
4) Satisfied
5) Extremely Satisfied

9. Please rate the delivery time of food?

1) Extremely Unsatisfied
2) Unsatisfied
3) Neutral
4) Satisfied
5) Extremely Satisfied

10. Please rate if the opening and closing timings convenient?

1) Extremely Unsatisfied
2) Unsatisfied
3) Neutral
4) Satisfied
5) Extremely Satisfied