Project Final Edited
Project Final Edited
Project Final Edited
Dissertation Submitted to
MASTER OF COMMERCE
By
DEEPU JOSE TOM
(Reg No.170011016087)
CERTIFICATE
Faculty Guide
Labbakkada
Place: Labbakkada
Place: Labbakkada
Date:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all, I thank the God Almighty who has given me power, strength, and
inspiration during the time of this work.
I express my sincere gratitude to Dr. K.M Mathew, Principal J.P.M Arts and
Science College, Labbakkada.
I also thankful to my friends for all the help given to me during the dissertation
work. I also extent my sincere thanks to my parents for their inspiration and
financial aid.
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF DIAGRAMS
1 INTRODUCTION 1-8
2 THEORETICAL FRAME 9 - 25
WORK
3 ANALYSIS AND 26 - 60
INTERPRETATION
4 FINDINGS, SUGGESTIONS 61 - 66
AND
CONCLUSIONS
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDIX
LIST OF TABLES
3.1 Age 28
3.2 Gender 29
3.3 Sources of income 31
3.4 Availability of HUL products in the 32
market
3.1 Age 28
3.2 Gender 30
3.3 Sources of income 31
3.4 Availability of HUL products in the 33
market
1
1.1 INTRODUCTION
2
(FMCG). Soon after followed Lifebouy in 1895 and other famous brands like
Pears, Lux and Vim.Vanaspati was launched in 1918 and the famous Dalda
brand came to the market in 1937.
3
mechanisms to reach the millions of potentialconsumers in both urban areas
and small remote villages where there is no retail distributionnetwork, no
advertising coverage, and poor roads and transport. To maintain
theircompetitive advantage, it has aggressively extended more deeply in
India, moving from largeto small towns, and from urban to semi-urban areas.
Fast Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) can be defined as packed goods that
are consumed or sold at regular and small intervals. India’s personal care
industry is composed of hair care , bath products, skin care and cosmetics and
oral care. The sector is driven by rising income , rapid urbanization and
celebrity promotions. This industry accounts 22% of the country’s fast-
moving consumer goods (FMCG), which is the term for Consumer Packaged
Goods in India. The market size of the Indian FMCG sector is expected to
reach USD 33.4 billion by the year 2015. The consumption of health and
personal care products in FMCG sector has increased in the recent past with
rise in disposable income especially among the early stages group in india. A
few of the FMCG products are:
Toiletries
Soaps and detergents
Cleaning and disinfecting agents
Cosmetics
Non-durables
Pharmaceuticals
Further, the packaged food products and drinks are also sold under the
FMCG, since these items are consumed or bought at regular intervals.
4
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
There are various types of fast moving consumer goods distributed by variety
of companies and brands all over the country. Also day by day or year by
year new companies are formed in the this field with huge investments to
satisfy the unending needs of the customers. In this contest I have undergone
a study on the brand preference of Hindustan Unilever products in
Kattappana Municipality.
This study is made to know about the various products of Hindustan Unilever
and how the preference of consumers over the products offered by it. The
study is confined to Kattappana Municipality. The sample includes people in
different age categories and educational backgrounds.
5
To know the different sources in which the customers get the brand
information.
To know the percentage of selecting HUL products in different
categories on the basis of price.
To provide suggestions for improvement or change in the quality,
price, brand image, availability etc of HUL products.
To study what people expect in the era of developing technology and
economy.
DATA COLLECTION
The data requires for the study were collected from both primary and
secondary sources.
Primary data
6
Secondary data
SAMPLING
ANALYTICAL TOOLS
7
PERIOD OF THE STUDY
The period of the study was conducted for a period of six months from 1 st
October 2018 to 31st march 2019.
Although sincere efforts have been made to collect the maximum information
from the respondents, this research is subject to the following limitations.
CHAPTER SCHEME
8
CHAPTER 2
9
Unilever
Unilever owns over 400 brands, with a turnover in 2016 of 52.7 billion euros,
and in 2017 of 53.7 billion euros and thirteen brands with sales of over one
billioneuros: Axe/Lynx, Dove, Omo, Heartbrand icecreams, Hellmann's, Kno
rr, Lipton, Lux, Magnum, Rexona/Degree, Sunsilk and Surf. It is a dual-listed
company consisting of Unilever plc, based in London and Unilever N.V.,
based in Rotterdam but the company made their global headquarters in
Rotterdam. The two companies operate as a single business, with a common
board of directors. Unilever is organised into four main divisions – Foods,
Refreshment (beverages and ice cream), Home Care, and Personal Care. It
has research and development facilities in the United Kingdom (two), the
Netherlands, China, India and the United States.
10
Chesebrough-Ponds (1987), Best Foods (2000), Ben &
Jerry's (2000), Alberto-Culver (2010), Dollar Shave Club (2016) and Pukka
Herbs (2017). Unilever divested its speciality chemicals businesses to ICI in
1997. In 2015, under leadership of Paul Polman, the company started
gradually shifted its focus towards health and beauty brands and away from
food brands showing slow growth.
Unilever plc has a primary listing on the London Stock Exchange and is a
constituent of the FTSE 100 Index. Unilever N.V. has a primary listing
on Euro next Amsterdam and is a constituent of the AEX index. The
company is also a lux of the Euro 50 stock market index.
Hindustan Unilever Limited has its presence in India for the last many
decades, and with its iconic brands, and dedication towards serving its
consumers with quality products had made it the leading Fast Moving
Consumer Goods Company(FMCG). The underlying foundation of demand
is a model of how consumers behave. The Individual consumer has a set of
preferences and values whose determination is outside the real economics.
They depend upon culture, education, and individual tastes. The measure of
these values in this model for a particular product is in terms of the real
opportunity cost to the consumer who purchases and consumes the product.
The term "Marketing Mix" was coined in 1953 by Neil Borden in his
American Marketing Association presidential address. Marketing Mix is one
of the major concepts in modern marketing that influences consumer motives.
They are often designed to influence consumer decision-making and lead to
profitable exchanges. Each element of marketing mix can affect consumers in
many ways.
11
Company Profile
In the summer of 1888, visitors to the Kolkata harbor noticed crates full of
Sunlight soap bars, embossed with the words "Made in England by lever
Brothers". With it began an era of marketing branded Fast Moving Consumer
Goods (FMCG). Soon after followed Lifeboy in 1895 and other famous
brands like Pears, Lux and Vim.Vanaspati was launched in 1918 and the
famous Dalda brand came to the market in 1937.
The erstwhile Brooke Bond's presence in India dates back to 1900. By 1903,
the company had launched Red label tea in the country. In 1912, Brooke
Bond & Co. India Limited was formed. Brooke Bond joined the Unilever
fold in 1984 through an international acquisition. The ersrwhile Lipton's links
with India were forged in 1898. Unilever acquired Lipton in 1972 and in
1977 Lipton Tea (India) Limited was incorporated.
Pond's (India) Limited had been present in India since 1947. It joined the
Unilever fold through an international acquisition of Chesebrough Pond's
USA in 1986. Since the very early years, HUL has vigorously responded to
the stimulus of economic growth. The growth process has been accompanied
12
by judicious diversification, always in line with Indian opinions and
aspirations.
Liberalization of the Indian economy, started in 1991, clearly marked an
inflexion in HUL's and the Group's growth curve, Removal of the regulatory
framework allowed the company to explore every single product and
opportunity segment, without any constraints on production capacity.
Simultaneously, deregulation permitted alliances, acquisitions and mergers.
In one of the most visible and talked about events of India's corporate history,
the erstwhile Tata Oil Mills Company (TOMCO) merged With HUL,
effective from April 1, 1993.
In 1996 HUL and yet another Tata company, Lakme Limited, formed a
50:50 joint venture, Lakme Unilever Limited, to market Lakme's market-
leading cosmetics and other appropriate products of both the companies,
Subsequently in 1998, Lakme Limited sold its brands to HUL and divested its
50% stake in the joint venture to the company. HUL formed a 50·50 joint
venture with the US-based Kimberly Clark Corporation in 1994, Kimberly-
Clark Lever Ltd, which markets Huggies Diapers and Kotex Sanitary Pads.
HUL has also set up a subsidiary in Nepal, Unilever Nepal Limited (UNL) ,
and its factory represents the largest manufacturing investment in the
Himalayan kingdom, The UNL factory manufactures HUL's products like
Soaps, Detergents and Personal Products both for the domestic market and
exports to India.
13
As a measure of backward integration, Tea Estates and Doom Dooma, two
plantation companies of Unilever, were merged with Brooke Bond, Then in
1994, Brooke Bond India and Lipton India merged to form Brooke Bond
Lipton India Limited (BBLIL), enabling greater focus and ensuring synergy
in the traditional Beverages business, 1994 witnessed BBLIL launching the
Wall's range of Frozen Desserts. By the end of the year, the company entered
into a strategic alliance with the Kwality Ice-cream Group families and in
1995 the Milk-food 100% Ice-cream marketing and distribution rights too
were acquired
Finally, BBLIL merged with HUL, with effect from January 1, 1996, The
internal restructuring culminated in the mergerof Pond's (India) Limited (PIL)
with HUL in 1998, The two companies had significant overlaps in Personal
Products, Specialty Chemicals and Exports businesses, besides a common
distribution system since 1993 for Personal Products. The two also had a
common management pool and a technology base, The amalgamation was
done to ensure for the Group, benefits from scale economies both in domestic
and export markets and enable it to fund investments required for
aggressively building new categories.
14
Marine Products exports. HUL launched a slew of new business initiatives
in the early part of 2000’s. Project Shakti was started in 2001. It is a rural
initiative that targets small villages populated by less than 5000 individuals.
It is a unique win-win initiative that catalyses rural affluence even as it
benefits business. Currently, there are over 45,000 Shakti entrepreneurs
covering over 100,000 villages across 15 states and reaching to over 3
million homes.
In 2002, HUL made its foray into Ayurvedic health & beauty centre
category with the Ayush product range and Ayush Therapy
Centres.Hindustan Unilever Network, Direct to home business was
launched in 2003 and this was followed by tile launch of 'Pure-it' water
purifier in 2004. In 2007, the Company name was formally changed to
Hindustan Unilever Limited after receiving the approval of share holders
during the 74th AGM on 18 May 2007. Brooke Bond and Surf Excel
breached Rs 1,000 crore sales mark the same year followed by Wheel
which crossed the Rs.2000 crore sales milestone in 2008. On 17th October
2008, HUL completed 75 years of corporate existence in India.
MISSION
15
ORIGIN
Soon after followed Lifeboy in 1895 and other famous brands like Pears, Lux
and Vim.Vanaspati was launched in 1918 and the famous Dalda brand came
to the market in 1937. In 1931, Unilever set up its first Indian subsidiary,
Hindustan Vanaspati Manufacturing Company, followed by Lever Brothers
India Limited (1933) and United Traders Limited (1935).
Unilever now holds 52.10% equity in the company. The rest of the
shareholding is distributed among about 360,675 individual shareholders and
financial institutions.
MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE
16
BOARD
Management Committee
Leadership
17
BRANDS
Personal Wash
Lux
Lifebuoy
Liril
Hamam
Breeze
Dove
Pears
Rexona
Laundry
Surf Excel
Rin
Wheel
Skin Care
18
Oral Care
Pepsodent
Closeup
Deodorants
Rexona
Axe
Ayush
Colour Cosmetics
Lakme
Tea
Brooke Bond
Lipton
Coffee
Brooke Bond Bru
19
Ice Creams
Kwality Wall’s
Foods
Kissan
Annapurna
Knorr
SWOT ANALYSIS
STRENGTHS
20
Low cost of production due to economic of scale. That means
higher profits and or more competitors. Better market penetration.
Weakness
Opportunities
• Globalization.
Threats
21
HUL's tea business has declined marginally; reason is that, cost
pressure is likely due to rising crude and freight costs.
Tax andregulatory structure.
Mimicof brands.
Removal of restrictions resulting in replacing of domestic brands.
Temporary slowdown ineconomy can have an impact on FMCG in
Industry.
Headquarters
Awards
22
The Institute of Competitiveness, India, has recognized Hindustan Unilever
Limited’s Project Shakti for ‘Creating Shared Value’ and bestowed upon the
company the Porter Prize for 2014. It ranked number one on the Forbes list of
‘Most Innovative Companies’ across the globe for 2014 and was ranked
number three on Fortune India’s list of India’s most admired companies in a
list compiled with the help of a global management consultancy Hay
Group. It received an award from Dun & Bradstreet Corporate Awards in
2014. and was Client of the Year at Effies 2013 – 2014. It also received an
award as a 'Conscious Capitalist of the Year' at the 2013 Forbes India
Leadership Awards. HUL won 12 awards overall with 4 Gold, 4 Silver and 4
Bronze at the 2013 Emvies Awards. In 2013, HUL ranked number two on the
on Fortune India's 2013 '50 Most Admired Companies list'. and was declared
the fourth most Respected Company in India in a survey conducted by
Business World in 2013.
The company received four awards at the Spikes Asia Awards 2012, held in
September. The awards included one Grand Prix one Gold Award and two
Silver Awards.
23
HUL's Chhindwara Unit won the National Safety Award for outstanding
performance in Industrial Safety. These awards were instituted by the Union
Ministry of Labour and Employment in 1965.
HUL was one of the eight Indian companies to be featured on the Forbes list
of World's Most Reputed companies in 2007.
In May 2012, HUL & Star Bazaar received the silver award for 'Creating
Consumer Value through Joint Promotional and Event Forecasting' at the
13th ECR Efficient Consumer Response Asia Pacific Conference.
In 2011, HUL was named the most innovative company in India by Forbes
and ranked 6th in the top 10 list of most innovative companies in the world.
24
Hay Group. The company received the highest scores for endurance and
financial soundness
HUL was ranked 47th in The Brand Trust Report 2014 published by Trust
Research Advisory. 36 HUL brands also featured in the list including
Lux, Dove, Lipton, Vim, Kissan, Bru, Rexona, Close Up, Clinic Plus, Pond's,
Knorr, and Pepsodent among others.
HUL emerged as the top 'Dream Employer' as well as the top company
considered for application in the annual B-School Survey conducted by
Nielsen in November 2010. This was the second successive year that HUL
has been rated as the top 'Dream Employer' in India. HUL has also emerged
as the top employer of choice among the top six Indian Institutes of
Management (IIMA, B, C, L, K and I).
HUL won three awards at the 'CNBC Awaaz Storyboard Consumer Awards'
in 2011 – Most Recommended FMCG Company of the Year; Most
Consumer Conscious Company of the Year and Digital Marketer of the Year.
The company was felicitated in April 2010 for receiving the highest number
of patents in the year 2009 at Annual Intellectual Property Awards 2010.
25
CHAPTER 3
26
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
27
3.1 AGE WISE CLASSIFICATION OF BRAND
PREFERENCE OF RESPONDENTS
Table : 3.1
Figure 3.1
80 76%
70
60
50
40 No.of Respondents
30
Percentage
20 10% 12%
10 2%
0
Between 10 20 - 30 30 - 40 Above 40
- 20
28
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 2 % of the respondents are in the age
group between 10-20 , 76% of the respondents are in the age group between
20-30, 10% of the respondents are in the age group between 30-40 and 12%
of the respondents are in the age group above 40.
Table : 3.2
29
Figure 3.2
Gender
Female
Male Female
46% Male
54%
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 46% of the respondents are male and
54% of the respondents are female.
In this study, respondents were classified on the basis main source of income
of their family.
30
Table : 3.3
Figure 3.3
30 26% 26%
25
20 16%
13 14% 13
15
7 8% 8
10 6%
3 4% 4
5 2 No. of Respondents
0 Percentage
31
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 26% of the respondents main source
of family’s income is agriculture, 6% of the respondents main source of
family’s income is business, 4% of the respondents main source of family’s
income is from agricultural labour, 14% of the respondents main source of
family’s income is from other labour, 8% of the respondents main source of
family’s income is from government job, 16% of the respondents main
source of family’s income is from self employment and 26% of the
respondents main source of family’s income is from other sources.
Table : 3.4
32
Figure 3.4
Easily available
Not easily available
96%
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 96% of the respondents has easy
availability of HUL products and 4% of the respondents does not have easy
availability of HUL products.
In this study, respondents were classified on the basis of the usually preferred
HUL‘s product by respondents.
33
Table : 3.5
Figure 3.5
32%
35
30 26%
25 20%
20 16
13
15 10% 10% 10
10 5 5 No. of Respondents
5 1 2% 0 0%
Percentage
0
34
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 32% of the respondent’s usually
preferred HUL product is bathing soap, 26% of the respondent’s usually
preferred HUL product is skin care products, 2% of the respondent’s usually
preferred HUL product is food products, 10% of the respondent’s usually
preferred HUL product is deodorants, 10% of the respondent’s usually
preferred HUL product is detergent powder,20 % of the respondent’s
usually preferred HUL product is tooth paste and 0% of the respondent’s
usually preferred HUL product is others.
In this study, respondents were classified on the basis of the average annual
income of respondents.
Table : 3.6
35
Figure 3.6
40 36%
34%
35
30
25 20%
17 18 No. of Respondents
20
15 10 10% Percentage
10 5
5
0
Upto 50,000 50,000 – 1,00,001 – Above
1,00,000 5,00,000 5,00,000
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 20% of the respondents has average
annual income upto 50,000, 34% of the respondents has average annual
income is between 50,000 to 1,00,000 , 36% of the respondents has average
annual income is between 1,00,001 to 5,00,000 and 10 % of the respondents
has average annual income is above 5,00,000.
36
Table : 3.7
Figure 3.7
90 54%
80
70
60
32%
50 Percentage
40 No. of Respondents
30
20 10%
27
10 4% 16
2 5
0
1 to 2 3 to 4 4 to 5 Above 5
37
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 4% of the respondents has family
size between 1 – 2 members, 54 % of the respondents has family size
between 3 – 4 members, 32 % of the respondents has family size between 4 –
5 members and 10% of the respondents has family size above 5 members.
In this study, respondents were classified on the basis the number of income
earning individuals in respondent’s family.
Table : 3.8
38
Figure 3.8
46%
42%
70
60
50
40 Percentage
30
8% No. of Respondents
20 4%
23 21
10
4 2
0
1 2 3 More
than 3
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 46% of the respondents have 1
income earning individual in their family, 42% of the respondents have 2
income earning individuals in their family, 8% of the respondents have 3
income earning individuals in their family and 4 % of the respondents have
more than 3 income earning individuals in their family.
In this study, respondents were classified on the basis the format of purchase
of the respondents.
39
Table : 3.9
Figure 3.9
50%
50
45
40
35
30 26% 25
25 No. of Respondents
20 16% Percentage
13
15
8 8%
10 4
5
0
Super market Departmental Retail stores Others
Stores
40
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 26% of the respondents format of
purchase is supermarkets, 16% of the respondents format of purchase is
Departmental Stores, 50% of the respondents format of purchase is Retail
stores and 8% of the respondents format of purchase is others.
Table : 3.10
41
Figure 3.10
10%
Never
5
70%
Sometimes Percentage
35
No. of Respondents
20%
Very frequently
10
0 20 40 60 80
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 20% of the respondents very
frequently change their FMCG brand,70 % of the respondents sometimes
change their FMCG brand and 10% of the respondents never change their
FMCG brand.
42
Table : 3.11
Table showing the willingness to spend premium price for FMCG brands.
Figure 3.11
Figure showing the willingness to spend premium price for FMCG brands.
100
80
56% Percentage
60
44%
No. of Respondents
40
20 28 22
0
Willing Not Willing
43
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 56% of the respondents were willing
to spend premium price for FMCG products and 44% of the respondents
were not willing to spend premium price for FMCG products.
Table : 3.12
44
Figure 3.12
40 38%
35
30
26%
25
19 18%
20 No. of Respondents
15 13
Percentage
8% 9 8%
10
4 4
5
1 2%
0
Family Peers TV ads Point of Websites Others
members sale
Interpretation
45
3.13 SATISFACTION LEVEL OF EXISTING HUL
PRODUCT’S QUALITY
Table : 3.13
46
Figure 3.13
90%
140
120
100
Percentage
80
No. of Respondents
60
40 10%
45
20
5
0
Satisfied Not satisfied
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 90% of the respondents were
satisfied with the existing HUL products’ quality, 10% of the respondents
were not satisfied with the existing HUL products’ quality.
In this study, respondents were classified on the basis factors influencing the
product selection.
47
Table : 3.14
Figure 3.14
60
50
40
30
Percentage
20
Factors
10
0
Brand
Quality
Price
Service
48
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 26% of the respondents select the
FMCG products on the basis of brand, 34% of the respondents select the
FMCG products on the basis of quality, 24% of the respondents select the
FMCG products on the basis of price and 16% of the respondents select the
FMCG products on the basis of service.
In this study, brand preference of respondents towards skin care brands are
classified on the basis of price.
Table : 3.15.1
Table showing the brand preference of respondents towards skin care brands
are classified on the basis of price.
49
Source: Primary Data
Figure 3.15.1
Figure showing the brand preference of respondents towards skin care brands
are classified on the basis of price.
28% 28%
30 22%
20 12%
11 14 10% 14
10 6
5
0
No. of Respondents
Percentage
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 22% of the respondents prefer ponds
on the basis of price, 12% of the respondents prefer Garnier on the basis of
price, 28% of the respondents prefer Himalaya on the basis of price, 10% of
the respondents prefer Nivea on the basis of price and 28% of the respondents
prefer Fair and Lovely on the basis of price.
50
3.15.2 HAIR CARE BRANDS
In this study, brand preference of respondents towards hair care brands are
classified on the basis of price.
Table : 3.15.2
Table showing the brand preference of respondents towards hair care brands
are classified on the basis of price.
51
Figure 3.15.2
Figure showing the brand preference of respondents towards hair care brands
are classified on the basis of price.
34%
35 32%
30
25
20 18%
17
16 16% No. of Respondents
15 Percentage
9
10 8
0
Head & Clinic Plus Pantene Dheedhi
Shoulders
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 32% of the respondents prefer Head
& Shoulders on the basis of price, 34% of the respondents prefer Clinic Plus
on the basis of price, 18% of the respondents prefer Pantene on the basis of
price and 16% of the respondents prefer Dheedhi on the basis of price.
52
3.15.3 DETERGENT POWDER BRANDS
Table : 3.15.3
53
Figure 3.15.3
40%
40 30%
20 16%
20 15
8 6% 8%
No. of Respondents
3 4
0 Percentage
Surf No. of Respondents
Tide Ariel
excel Rin Wheel
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 40% of the respondents prefer Surf
excel on the basis of price, 16% of the respondents prefer Tide on the basis of
price, 30% of the respondents prefer Ariel on the basis of price, 6% of the
respondents prefer Rin on the basis of price and 8% of the respondents prefer
Wheel on the basis of price.
54
3.15.4 TOILET SOAP BRANDS
In this study, brand preference of respondents towards Toilet soap brands are
classified on the basis of price.
Table : 3.15.4
55
Figure 3.15.4
20% 20%
20
18 16%
16 14%
14
12 10 10 10% 10% 10%
10 8 No. of Respondents
8 7
Percentage
6 5 5 5
4
2
0
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 16% of the respondents prefer
Hamam on the basis of price, 20% of the respondents prefer Pears on the
basis of price, 20% of the respondents prefer Dove on the basis of price, 10%
of the respondents prefer Cinthol on the basis of price, 10% of the
respondents prefer Dettol on the basis of price, 10% of the respondents prefer
Medimix on the basis of price and 14 % of the respondents prefer Lifebouy
on the basis of price.
56
3.15.5 TOOTH PASTE BRANDS
In this study, brand preference of respondents towards Tooth paste brands are
classified on the basis of price.
Table : 3.15.5
57
Figure 3.15.5
45
40%
40
35
30
25 22% 22%
20 No. of Respondents
20
16% Percentage
15
11 11
10 8
5
0
Hamam Pears Dove Cinthol
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 40% of the respondents prefer
Colgate on the basis of price, 22% of the respondents prefer Close up on the
basis of price, 16% of the respondents prefer Pepsodent on the basis of price
and 22% of the respondents prefer K.P Namboothiri’s on the basis of price.
58
3.15.6 DEODORANTS BRANDS
Table : 3.15.6
59
Figure 3.15.6
30%
30
25
20%
20 18% 18%
15
14% No. of Respondents
15
10 Percentage
9 9
10 7
0
Rexona Axe Fogg Denver Engage
Interpretation
From the above figure, it is inferred that 20% of the respondents prefer
Rexona on the basis of price, 30% of the respondents prefer Axe on the basis
of price, 18% of the respondents prefer Fogg on the basis of price and 14% of
the respondents prefer Denver on the basis of price, and 18% of the
respondents prefer Engage on the basis of price.
60
TESTING OF HYPOTHESIS
H1: There is significant relation between quality and price of HUL products.
2 6 4 8 1 4 25
Not 5 6 4 4 2 4 25
Satisfied
Total 7 12 8 12 3 8 50
61
EXPECTED FREQUENCY TABLE
ie,= 6-1=5
ie, Calculated value is more than table value. So, null hypothesis is rejected
and alternative hypothesis is accepted.
So, There is significant relation between quality and price of HUL products.
62
CHAPTER 4
63
FINDINGS
MAJOR FINDINGS
64
SUGGESTIONS
An attempt should be made by HUL management to tap all the
potentials offered by the global market by devoting a more substantial,
efficient and better equipped resource base. This task can be
accomplished in the first place by implementing a stronger and more
ending distribution channel for various products so that even those
sections of consumers who are not accessible so easily, can be covered
with greater ease.
Efficient infrastructural base coupled with better and more
comprehensive advertising strategies should be resorted to; though
HUL is presently surfing ahead of others on the path of taking some
great initiatives it should be more concerned about it for the purpose
of corporate image building.
Hyper marketing and retailing net work should get special attention
as vital components of HUL's marketing policy .
An attempt should be made to ensure more brand preference building
towards tooth paste brands of HUL.
HUL products should concentrate more on the services offered to the
customers, which is a factor that influence the product selection.
HUL should go for more planned and sensible marketing and
advertising strategies with a view to accomplishing the task of global
brand image buildings.
HUL products should concentrate on online marketing also with the
retail and wholesale marketing done by it.
Since most of the customers are willing to spend premium price for
good products HUL should concentrate on the quality of the products
offered by it.
65
CONCLUSION
In recent years, the FMCG sector declined due to down trading. Also because
of presence of large number of companies trying to seize this opportunity,
this force the old HUL for the change and thus, their transformation has
resulted in a new HU L, which has successfully faced this challenge and
reversed this trend. It has done so by substantially strengthening their brands
and building capabilities. This has already begun to yield benefits and they
are returning to growth. Volume growth is being followed by value growth,
which in turn is bringing profit growth.
India is one of the most exciting markets offering great potential. Over the
next 10 years, the per capita income in India is likely to double. In FMCG,
there is an opportunity to catalyze penetration, increase usage, and upgrade
consumers. As a result, the FMCG market is expected to grow to over
Rs.l00,000 cores from its current base of Rs.40,000 cores.
The new Hindustan lever see an exciting opportunity for growth. They have
35 powerful brands covering all segments, with leading market positions in
most. Today, these are stronger and more relevant to the consumer than ever.
The people are energized by the scale of the opportunity and determined to
seize it. The scale of the business and operations gives them the resources
needed. They are delivering good services and the changes they brought in
the products are well taken by the customers, by this they are generating
sustainable profitable growth.
66
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Websites
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindustan_Unilever
2. https://www.scribd.com/document/312655246/A-Study-on-Customer-
Satisfaction-About-p-g-and-Hul
3. http://www.allresearchjournal.com/archives/2016/vol2issue7/PartB/2-5-
15-718.pdf
4. https://www.slideshare.net/KalpeshAPatel/behaviour-towards-products-
of-hindustan-unilever-ltd-h
5. https://www.hul.co.in/brands/
6. https://www.hul.co.in/Images/annual-report-2015-16_tcm1255-
482421_en.pdf
7. https://www.hul.co.in/about/who-we-are/our-history
Books
1. Research Methodology
- C.R Kothari
- L.R Potti
Magazines
1. Business World
Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.
Alternative Proxies: