A STUDY OF CONSUMER

DECISION MAKING
VARIABLES ON ZOMATO
Under the guidance of
Prof. Jaineel Shah Presented by
Sachin Joshi Roll No.- P1722
Batch- 2017-19
 FLOW OF PRESENTATION

Research Data analysis Findings &

Introduction of Introduction of Methodology & Conclusion
Industry company Interpretation

Online About Objectives Charts Bibliography

Food Zomato
Delivery
Revenue Research
Model Tables
Major Design
Playors
SWOT
Business Analysis
Model
ONLINE FOOD DELIVERY

Restaurant-to-
Consumer
Online Food Delivery
Delivery
Platform-to-
Consumer
Delivery
History of online food delivery

1994
MAJOR PLAYERS OF ONLINE FOOD DELIVERY
MARKETPLACE
ABOUT ZOMATO

Founded in 2008, headquartered in

Gurugram.
Zomato is a leading platform for
restaurant search & discovery,
online food ordering, and restaurant
table reservations.
Zomato Currently Operates in 23+
countries including Dubai, UK,
Brazil, Canada, Australia, Turkey,
Poland and New Zealand.
REVENUE MODEL OF ZOMATO

Advertising

Restaurant
HyperPure Guide

ZOMATO
REVENUE
MODEL Online Food
Zomato Base Ordering

Zomato Zomato Book

Whitelabel
RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

• To evaluate performance and acceptability in terms of security, user friendliness, accuracy and
reliability.

• To understand consumer behaviour and perception towards zomato.

• To study the consumer decision making variables regarding zomato.

Research Design Descriptive research

Research Instrument Questionnaire

Sample size 150

Sample area Ahmedabad

Sampling method Non Probability/ Convenience Sampling

Statistical package SPSS

DATA ANALYSIS &
INTERPRETATION
CHARTS, TABLE & HYPOTHESIS
 Hygienic Food Help Services of Zomato

7.31%
3.30%

65.37%
Extremely Hygienic 42.70% Find it extremely
Somewhat Hygienic satisfied
Not at all Hygienic Somewhat satisfied
Not satisfied
54.00%
27.33%
 Debit/Credit Card
Choice of restaurant

5.30%
Good choice than Agree; 33.30%
others
Same as others
48.00% Bad choice than others
46.70% Disagree; 66.70%

Delivery Charges
13.30% 16.70%

Agree Disagree

70.00%

Low Medium High

 Trustworthiness Responsiveness

2.70% 2.00% Strongly agree 17.28% 2.70% 0.70%

25.30% 26.67%
15.30% Strongly agree
Agree
Agree
Can’t say
Can’t say
54.70%
Strongly disagree
Strongly disagree
52.65%
Disagree Disagree

Politeness Communication

23.32%
18.02%
3.30% 1.30% Strongly agree
2.70% 1.30%
17.30%
Agree Strongly agree
22.00%
Can’t say Agree

Strongly disagree Can’t say

Disagree 56.70%
Strongly disagree
54.05%
Disagree
 Delivery Freshness of food

1.30%
3.30%
8.00% Strongly agree 3.30%
Strongly agree
Agree
Agree
36.70% Can’t say 18.02% 29.33%
Can’t say
Strongly disagree
Strongly disagree
Disagree

50.70% 49.35%

Competency Quality of food

0.70%
4.00%
1.30% 2.00%
Strongly agree Strongly agree
17.30% 28.00%
13.30% Agree Agree

28.70% Can’t say Can’t say

Strongly disagree Strongly disagree
Disagree Disagree

54.70%
50.00%
 Website /application easiness of Zomato Website/application quality of Zomato

60
60

50

50

40

31.2% 25.2%
22.7% 40

30 224% 23.6% 26.2% 24.9%

22.1%
30
20

Disagree
Strongly Disagree 20
10
Can't Say
Disagree
Agree
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree 10
0 Can't Say
r
g

h
n

de
rc
in

io

Agree
or
ea
ad

at
ig

fs

of
lo

av

o
of

ce

Strongly Agree
se
fn

en

0
ed

Ea
o

qu
e

Security Payment Design Information

se
Sp

se
Ea

Strongly Agree Agree Can't Say Strongly Disagree Disagree

al
ic

Strongly Agree Agree Can't Say Strongly Disagree Disagree

g
Lo
 Female with respect to hygienic
6 11.
64.
24.
6 40
3030
. %%%
Male with respect
3 2 to hygiene Extremely hygienic
. 0
8 %
Gender 4%
03
Somewhat hygienic
%0
. Extremely
0 hygienic
0 Not at all hygienic
% Somewhat
hygienic

Not at all hygienic

Female with respect to logical sequence

Male with respect to logical sequence

Female; 46.70%
16.43.
Male; 53.30% 6.2
8.8
80
25.
20
00%
%00
%%%
Strongly Agree 1.40% 2.90%
20.00% Strongly Agree
Agree 20.00%

Can't Say Agree

Strongly Disagree Can't Say

Disagree 55.70% Strongly Disagree

Disagree
 Married with respect to help services Unmarried with respect to help services

4.00
54.741.2
%
5% 6%

50.00% 50.00% Find it extremely satisfied

Find it extremely satisfied

Somewhat satisfied

Somewhat satisfied
Not satisfied

Married; 16.00%

Married with respect to risk in shairing debit /cedit card details

Unmarried with respect to risk in shairing debit/credit card details

29.20%
34.10%

Unmarried; 84.00%
65.90%
70.80%

Agree

Agree Disagree
Disagree
 HYPOTHESIS
Sr. Hypothesis (H0) P- Mean Accepted/N
No. Value Value ot Accepted
1 There is no significance of income on delivery charges of 0.03 Not Accepted
Zomato
 

2 H0: µ = 3 (Trustworthiness) 0.00 2.01 Not Accepted

3 H0: µ = 3 (Delivery) 0.00 1.82 Not Accepted

4 H0: µ = 3 (design) 0.00 1.89 Not Accepted

5 H0: µ = 3 (information) 0.00 1.99 Not Accepted

6 H0: µ1 = µ2 ( Ease of navigation with Gender) 0.98 M- 2.03 Accepted

F- 2.16
Sr. No. Hypothesis (H0) P- Value Mean Accepted/Not
Value Accepted

7 H0: µ1 = µ2 ( Ease of search with Gender) 0.12 M- 1.95 Accepted

F- 2.01

8 There is no Significance difference between 0.37 Accepted

occupation and freshness of food

9 There is no Significance difference between 0.50 Accepted

payment as a quality of
website/application and occupation
10 There is no Significance difference between 0.98 Accepted
security as a quality of website/application
and income
Factor analysis

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .772

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 789.301

Df 120

Sig. .000
Communalities
  Initial Extraction
Trustworthiness 1.000 .659
Responsiveness 1.000 .697
Politeness 1.000 .620
Communication 1.000 .554
Competency 1.000 .624
Delivery 1.000 .629
Freshness of food 1.000 .765
Quality of food 1.000 .673
Speed of loading 1.000 .729
Ease of navigation 1.000 .779
Ease of search 1.000 .788
Logical sequence of order 1.000 .683
Website/app security 1.000 .712
Website/app payment 1.000 .797
Website/app design 1.000 .721
Website/app information 1.000 .825
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Total Variance Explained

Compon Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Rotation Sums of Squared

ent Loadings Loadings
Total % of Cumulative Total % of Cumulative Total % of Cumulative
Variance % Variance % Variance %
1 5.007 31.295 31.295 5.007 31.295 31.295 2.176 13.598 13.598
2 1.553 9.707 41.001 1.553 9.707 41.001 2.043 12.767 26.365
3 1.340 8.376 49.378 1.340 8.376 49.378 1.815 11.345 37.710
4 1.260 7.874 57.252 1.260 7.874 57.252 1.796 11.228 48.938
5 1.058 6.613 63.864 1.058 6.613 63.864 1.775 11.094 60.032
6 1.035 6.471 70.335 1.035 6.471 70.335 1.649 10.304 70.335
7 .809 5.055 75.390            
8 .628 3.926 79.316            
9 .612 3.823 83.138            
10 .592 3.698 86.836            
11 .530 3.312 90.148            
12 .398 2.489 92.637            
13 .371 2.319 94.956            
14 .290 1.814 96.769            
15 .281 1.756 98.526            
16 .236 1.474 100.000            
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5 Factor 6

Service Quality Product Freshness Website/App Delivery Efficiency Website/App Website/App

Designing Browsing- Security &
Processing

Responsiveness Responsiveness Quality of Ease of navigation Speed of loading

website/ app Trustworthiness
design

Politeness Freshness of food Quality of Ease of search Security

website/ app Delivery
information

Communication Quality of food Payment

Competency
Findings

 From the research it came to know that 48% of the people feels that Zomato has good choice of
restaurant as compare to other players in the industry.

 As per the research it is found that 66.7% of the people thinks that there is no risk in sharing
debit or credit card details in Zomato’s website or application.

 With respect to the service quality majority of the people are satisfied with the trustworthiness,
responsiveness and politeness of zomato.

 As per the research it came to know that most of the people are agree that zomato is good in
terms of delivery and they are satisfied with zomato’s delivery services.

 As per the research it is found that majority of the respondents are agree that the speed of
processing in the website and application is high. People are also satisfied with the easiness of
navigation within the website and app. Respondents also feel that it is easy to search and
browse and the content in the website or app is in logical sequence.
Conclusion

◊ As per the study the consumer’s perception and decision making variables regarding ordering
food from zomato varies from individual to individual and the perception is limited to a certain
extent with the quality of services, choices of restaurant, quality of food delivered, help
services, quality and easiness of website and application.

◊ The results of this study provide good support for the relationships between consumer
perceptions of service, product quality, product freshness, easiness of site and their continued
loyalty for the brand zomato.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
 Ahmed, Z. K. (December 2015). Key Success Factors of Online Food Ordering Services:An Empirical Study.
School of Management Asia e University, 1-19.
 Das, J. (2018). CONSUMER PERCEPTION TOWARDS ‘ONLINE FOOD ORDERING AND DELIVERY
SERVICES’:AN EMPIRICAL STUDY. Journal of Management (JOM).
 Ghadiyali, D. N. (2017). A STUDY ON CUSTOMER’S ATTITUDE AND PERCEPTION TOWARDS DIGITAL
FOOD APP SERVICES.
 Gupta, A. (November 29, 2018). Rise in Income and Internet Facilities to Drive Online Food Delivery Market in
India. KenResearch.
 Hult, K. K. (2005). Customer Behavior in an Online Ordering Application: A Decision Scoring Model. Decision
Sciences, 569-598.
 Hult, K. K. (December 2005). Customer Behavior in an Online Ordering Application: A Decision Scoring Model.
Decision Sciences Volume 36 Number 4, 1-30.
 Ismail, Z. K. (December 2015). Key Success Factors of Online Food Ordering Services: An Empirical Study. 20-
36.
 Jenvild, K. V. (2014). THE NEW INDIAN CONSUMER: FOOD SERVICES TRENDS. International Journal of
Management and Commerce Innovations, 255-267.
There Is No Sincere Love Than
The Love Of Food

THANK YOU