Project Final Edited

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 77

A STUDY ON THE BRAND PREFERENCE OF HINDUSTAN

UNILEVER PRODUCTS WITH REFERENCE TO


KATTAPPANA MUNICIPALITY

Dissertation Submitted to

Mahatma Gandhi University,


Kottayam, Kerala

In partial fulfillment of the requirements


For the award of degree of

MASTER OF COMMERCE
By
DEEPU JOSE TOM
(Reg No.170011016087)

Under the Guidance & Supervision of


Mr. SHYNU K.S
Assistant Professor

P.G DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE


J.P.M ARTS AND SCIENCE COLLEGE
LABBAKKADA
2017 – 2019
PG DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
J.P.M ARTS AND SCIENCE COLLEGE
LABBAKKADA – 685511
IDUKKI (DISTRICT)
PH: 04868 259236

CERTIFICATE

I certify that the dissertation entitled as “A STUDY ON THE BRAND


PREFERENCE OF HINDUSTAN UNILEVER PRODUCTS WITH
REFERENCE TO KATTAPPANA MUNICIPALITY.”is a bona fide piece
of work done by DEEPU JOSE TOM in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the award of the Degree of MASTER OF COMMERCE in Mahatma
Gandhi University, under my supervision and guidance.

Mr. SHYNU K.S

Faculty Guide

Counter Signed by:

Mr. JOBINS JOY

Head of the Department of Commerce

J.P.M Arts and Science College

Labbakkada

Place: Labbakkada

Date: Seal External Examiner


DECLARATION

I, DEEPU JOSE TOM , hereby declare that the dissertation entitled to as


“A STUDY ON THE BRAND PREFERENCE OF HINDUSTAN
UNILEVER PRODUCTS WITH REFERENCE TO KATTAPPANA
MUNICIPALITY.”is a bona fide work done by me under the supervision of
Mr. SHYNU K.S, Assistant Professor, P.G Department of Commerce, J.P.M
Arts and Science College, Labbakkada and has not been submitted earlier for
the award of any degree, diploma or similar other titles of any university or
Institutions.

DEEPU JOSE TOM

(Reg No. 170011016087)

Place: Labbakkada

Date:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am obliged to some dignified personalities whose valuable suggestions,


advice, encouragement, and criticisms helped me in shaping this work; I take
this opportunity to express my gratitude to all of them.

First of all, I thank the God Almighty who has given me power, strength, and
inspiration during the time of this work.

With great reverence, I express my heartfelt and sincere gratitude to Mr.Shynu


K.S, Assistant Professor Department of Commerce, J.P.M Arts and Science
College Labbakkada for his proficient assistance, incessant encouragement,
suggestions, inspirations, lovable corrections, committed state of mind, and all,
in the preparation of this project work.

I express my sincere gratitude to Mr. Jobins Joy, Head of the Department of


Commerce, JPM Arts and Science College, Labbakkada, for his encouragement
in the preparation of this project 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.

DEEPU JOSE TOM


CONTENTS

CHAPTERS TITLE PAGE NO.

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

Table Title Page No.


No.

3.1 Age 28
3.2 Gender 29
3.3 Sources of income 31
3.4 Availability of HUL products in the 32
market

3.5 HUL products usually preferred 34


3.6 Annual income 35
3.7 Family size 37
3.8 Number of income earning 38
individuals

3.9 Buying outlets 40


3.10 Frequency of change in FMCG 41
brands

3.11 Willingness to spend premium price 43


3.12 Sources of brand information 44
3.13 Satisfaction level on quality of HUL 46
products

3.14 Factors influencing product selection 48


Brand preference on the basis of
3.15
price

3.15.1 Skin care brands 49

3.15.2 Hair care brands 51

3.15.3 Detergent powder brands 53

3.15.4 Toilet soap brands 55

3.15.5 Tooth paste brands 57

3.15.6 Deodorants brands 59


LIST OF DIAGRAMS

Table Title Page No.


No.

3.1 Age 28
3.2 Gender 30
3.3 Sources of income 31
3.4 Availability of HUL products in the 33
market

3.5 HUL products usually preferred 34


3.6 Annual income 36
3.7 Family size 37
3.8 Number of income earning 39
individuals

3.9 Buying outlets 40


3.10 Frequency of change in FMCG 42
brands

3.11 Willingness to spend premium price 43


3.12 Sources of brand information 45
3.13 Satisfaction level on quality of HUL 47
products

3.14 Factors influencing product selection 48


3.15 Brand preference on the basis of
price

3.15.1 Skin care brands 50

3.15.2 Hair care brands 52

3.15.3 Detergent powder brands 54

3.15.4 Toilet soap brands 56

3.15.5 Tooth paste brands 58

3.15.6 Deodorants brands 60


CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

1
1.1 INTRODUCTION

Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) is a subsidiary ofUnilever, one of the


world's leading suppliers of fast moving consumer goods with strong local
roots in more than 100 countries across the globe with annual sales of 34,619
cores in 2017-18. Unileverhas about 52% shareholdingin HUL. Hindustan
Unileverwas recently rated among the top four companies globally in the list
of "Global Top Companies for Leaders" by a studysponsored by Hewitt
Associates.In partnership with Fortune magazine and the RBL Group. The
company was ranked number one in the Asia-Pacific region and in India.

In 1931,Unilever set up its first Indian subsidiary, Hindustan Vanaspati


Manufacturing Company, followed by Level' Brothers India Limited (1933)
and United Traders Limited (1935). These three companies merged to form
HUL in November 1956; HUL offered 10% of its equity to the Indian public,
being the first among the foreign subsidiaries to do so. 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.

Themission thatinspires HUL's more than18000 employees, includingover


1400 managers is to "add vitality of life". The company meets everyday
needs for nutrition, hygiene. and personal care, with brands, that help people
feel good, look good and get more outof life. It is a mission HUL shares with
its parent company, Unilever, Whichholds about52%of the equity. 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

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.

Customers in India are also spending more in FMCG as their standard of


living is growing. Hindustan Unilever Limited has placed itself successfully
in the position of market leader in FMCG products. To maintain their market
leadership, it pursues innovative distribution mechanisms to reach the
millions of potential consumers in both urban areas and small remote
villages. To maintain their competitive advantage, it has aggressively
extended more deeply in India, moving from large to small towns, and from
urban to semi-urban areas. The future of the company is also looking bright
as FMCG market in India is still expanding and so we can safely conclude
that HUL will be able to secure its number one position in FMCG product.

Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) is India’s largest Fast Moving Consumer


GoodsCompany. It works to create a better future every day and helps people
feel good, look goodand get more out of life with brands and services that are
good for them and good for others.The company introduced over 35 brands
such as soaps, detergents, shampoos, skin care,toothpastes, deodorants,
cosmetics, tea, coffee, packaged foods, ice cream, and waterpurifiers, the
Company is a part of the everyday life of millions of consumers across India.
Itis the leading household brands such as Lux, Lifebuoy, Surf Excel, Rin,
Wheel, Fair &Lovely, Pond’s, Vaseline, Lakme, Dove, Clinic Plus, Sunsilk,
Pepsodent, Close-up, Axe,
Brooke Bond, Bru, Knorr, Kissan, Kwality Wall’s and Pure it etc., To
maintain their marketleadership, it pursues innovative distribution

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.

1.3 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

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.

1.4 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

 The main objective of the study is to determine the brand preference


towards Hindustan Unilever products by the people in Kattappana
Municipality.
 To find and compare the level of satisfaction of customers in the
products offered by HUL.
 To know the income level of customers of HUL products.
 To know the HUL products which are usually preferred by the
consumers.

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.

1.5 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research methodology is a way to systematically solve the research


problem. It is a science of studying how research is done successfully.
It shows the various steps that are generally adopted by a researcher in
studying research problem along with the logic behind them. Research
methods have many dimensions and research methods constitute a part
of research methodology. It specifically deals with the following.

DATA COLLECTION
The data requires for the study were collected from both primary and
secondary sources.

Primary data

Primary data were collected through structured questionnaire form.The


questionnaires were givento the respondents. And the answers of questions were
considered as a primary data.

6
Secondary data

Secondary data were collected by referring websites, books and various


report publications of the Hindustan unilever company and Fast moving
consumer products.

SAMPLING

"Sampling can be defined as the process of selecting a representative portion


of the population under study for analysis ". The sampling method is used for
the study is convenient sampling and the sample size is 50.

ANALYTICAL TOOLS

The tools of analysis where percentage, charts, tables and graphs.

HYPOTHESIS OF THE STUDY

 HO:There is no significant relation between quality and price of HUL


products.
 H1: There is significant relation between quality and price of HUL
products.

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.

1.6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

Although sincere efforts have been made to collect the maximum information
from the respondents, this research is subject to the following limitations.

 The study is made in kattappana Municipality only.


 Only 50 respondents have been taken for the study.
 Only selected brands have been considered for the study.
 Since the sample size is small, it is not applicable to the universe.
 Time and cost are also factors that limiting to a sample of 50
respondents.

CHAPTER SCHEME

The report of the study has been represented in four chapters.

Chapter 1- The first chapter contains Introduction, statement of the problem,


scope of the study, objectives of the study, research methodology, data
collection, sampling, analytical tool, hypothesis of the study, limitation of the
study.

Chapter 2- Theoretical frame work

Chapter 3- Analysis and interpretation of data

Chapter 4- Findings, Suggestions and Conclusions

8
CHAPTER 2

THEORETICAL FRAME WORK

9
Unilever

Unilever is a British-Dutch transnational consumer goods company co-


headquartered in London, United Kingdom and Rotterdam, Netherlands. Its
products include food and beverages (about 40 percent of its
revenue), cleaning agents and personal care products. It is the world's largest
consumer goods company measured by 2012 revenue. It is Europe’s seventh
most valuable company. Unilever is one of the oldest multinational
companies; its products are available in around 190 countries.

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.

Unilever was founded in September 2nd, 1929, by the merger of


the Dutch margarine producer Margarine Unie and the British soap
maker Lever Brothers. During the second half of the 20th century the
company increasingly diversified from being a maker of products made of
oils and fats, and expanded its operations worldwide. It has made numerous
corporate acquisitions, including Lipton (1971), Brooke Bond (1984),

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

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.

Formerly Hindustan Lever Limited, is India's largest consumer products


company and was formed in 1933 as Lever Brothers India Limited. It is
currently headquartered in Mumbai, India and it is headed by Harish
Manwani, the non-executive chairman of the board. HUL is the market leader
in Indian products such as tea, soaps, detergents, as its products have become
daily household name inIndia. The Anglo-Dutch company Unilever owns a
majority stake in Hindustan Unilever Limited.

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.

The 1990s alsowitnesseda string of crucial mergers, acquisitions and


alliances on the Foods and Beverages front. In 1992, the erstwhile Brooke
Bond acquired Kothari General Foods, with significant interests in Instant
Coffee, In 1993, it acquired the Kissan business from the UB Group and the
DollopsIce-cream business from Cadbury 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.

In January 2000, in a historic step, the government decided to award 74


percent equity in Modern Foods to HUL, thereby beginning the divestment of
government equity in public sector undertakings (PSU) to private sector
partners. HUL's entry into Bread is a strategic extension of the company's
wheat business. In 2002, HUL acquired the government’s remaining stake in
Modern Foods.

In 2003, HUL acquired the Cooked Shrimp and Pasteurised Crabmeat


business of the Amalgam Group of Companies, a leader in value added

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

Unilever's mission is to add Vitality to life. Meet everyday needs for


nutrition, hygiene, and personal care with brands that help people feel good,
look good and get more out of life. It is a mission HUL shares with its parent
company, Unilever, which holds 52.10% of the equity. A Fortune 500
transnational, Unilever sells Foods and Home and Personal Care brands in
about 100 countries worldwide.

15
ORIGIN

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. 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).

These three companies merged to form HUL in November 1956; HUL


offered 10% of its equity to the Indian public, being the first among the
foreign subsidiaries to do so.

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

Hindustan UnileverLimited is India's largest Fast Moving Consumer Goods


(FMCG) Company. It is present in Home & Personal Care and Foods &
Beverages categories. HUL and Group companies have about 18,000
employees, including 1200 managers.The fundamental principle determining
the organization structure is to infuse speed and flexibility in decision-
making and implementation, with empowered managers across the company's
nationwide operations.

16
BOARD

The Board of Directors as repositories of the corporate powers act as a


guardian to the Company as also the protectors of shareholder's interest.This
Apex body comprises of a Non- Executive Chairman, four whole time
Directors and five independent Non - Executive Directors. The Board of the
Company represents the optimum mix of professionalism, knowledge and
experience.

Management Committee

The day-to-day management of affairs of the Company is vested with


the Management Committee which is subjectedto the overall
superintendence and control of the Board, The Management Committee
is headed by Mr. NitinParanjpe and has functional heads as its members
representing various functions of the Company.

Leadership

HUL has produced numerous business leaders for corporate India. It is


referred to as a 'CEO Factory' in the Indian press for the same reasons.It's
leadership building potential was recognized when it was ranked 4th in the
Hewitt Global Leadership Survey 2007 with only GE, P&G and Nokia
ranking ahead of HUL in the ability to churn out leaders with regularity.

17
BRANDS

HOME AND PERSONAL CARE

Personal Wash

 Lux
 Lifebuoy
 Liril
 Hamam
 Breeze
 Dove
 Pears
 Rexona

Laundry

 Surf Excel
 Rin
 Wheel

Skin Care

 Fair & Lovely


 Pond’s
 Vaseline
 Aviance

18
Oral Care

 Pepsodent
 Closeup

Deodorants

 Rexona
 Axe

Ayurvedic Personal And Health Care

 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

 Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) is India's largest Fast Moving


Consumer Goods Company, touching the lives of two out of three
Indians with over 20 distinct categories in Home & Personal Care
Products and Foods &Beverages .

 Due to its long presence inIndia - has deep penetration -20


consumer product category, over 18,000 employees, including over
1,300 managers, is to "add vitality to life."

 The company derives 44.3% of its revenues from soaps and


detergents, 26.6% from personal care products, 10.5% from
beverages, and the rest from foods, ice creams, exports, and
other products.

20
 Low cost of production due to economic of scale. That means
higher profits and or more competitors. Better market penetration.

 HUL is also one of thecountry's largest exporters; it has been


recognized as a Golden Super Star Trading House by the
Government of India.

Weakness

• Strong competitors and availabilityof substitute products

• Low export levels

• High price of some products

• High advertising cost

Opportunities

• Increasing per capitanational income resulting in higher disposable income.

• Growing middleclass and growing urban population.

• Increasing gifts cultures.

• Increasing departmentalstores concept- impulse @ at cash counters.

• 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

Hindustan Unilever's corporate headquarters are located


at Andheri (E), Mumbai. The campus is spread over 12.5 acres of land and
houses over 1,600 employees. Some of the facilities available for the
employees include a convenience store, a food court, an occupational health
centre, a gym, a sports& recreation centre and a day care centre. The Campus
is designed by Mumbai based architecture firm Kapadia Associates.

The campus received a certification from LEED (Leadership in Energy and


Environmental Design) Gold is a 'New Construction' category, by Indian
Green Building Council (IGBC), Hyderabad, under license from the United
States Green Building Council (USGBC)

The company's previous headquarters was located at Backbay Reclamation,


Mumbai at the Lever House, where it was housed for more than 46 years.

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.

As per a 2015 Nielsen Campus Track-business school survey, Hindustan


Unilever emerged among the top employers of choice for B-school students
graduating that year . It has often been called a 'Dream Employer' for
application by B-School students in India.

In 2012, HUL was recognized as one of the world's most innovative


companies by Forbes. With a ranking of number 6, it was the highest ranked
FMCG company. Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) won the first prize at
FICCI Water Awards 2012 under the category of 'community initiatives by
industry' for Gundar Basin Project, a water conservationist initiative.
Hindustan Unilever Limited won 13 awards at the Emvies 2012 Media
Awards organized by the Advertising Club Bombay in September 2012.

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 July 2012 Hindustan Unilever Limited won the Golden Peacock


Occupational Health and Safety Award for 2012 in the FMCG category for
its safety and health initiatives and continuous improvement on key metrics.

Hindustan Unilever Limited is rated as best 3Ci Company which is registered


with National Industrial Classification Code 15140.

Pond's Talcum Powder's packaging innovation has secured a Silver Award at


the prestigious 24th DuPont Global Packaging Award, in May 2012.The
brand was recognized for cost and waste reduction.

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.

Hindustan Unilever Ltd received the National Award for Excellence in


Corporate Governance 2011 of the Institute of Company Secretaries of India
(ICSI) for excellence in corporate governance

In 2012, Hindustan Unilever emerged as the No. 1 employer of choice for B-


School students who will graduate in 2012. In addition, HUL also retained
the 'Dream Employer' status for the 3rd year running

Hindustan Unilever ranked No. 2 in Fortune India's Most Admired


Companies list, which was released by Fortune India in partnership with the

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.

In 2007, Hindustan Unilever was rated as the most respected company in


India for the past 25 years by Business world, one of India's leading business
magazines. The rating was based on a compilation of the magazine's annual
survey of India's most reputed companies over the past 25 years.

HUL is one of the country's largest exporters; it has been recognized as a


Golden Super Star Trading House by the Government of India.

25
CHAPTER 3

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION


OFDATA

26
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

"A Study on the brand preference of Hindustan Unilever products with


reference to Kattappana Municipality" -is an exploratory studybased on
primary and secondary data collected from various websites, books and
other published sources. The primary data required for the study is
collected from 50 respondents living in Kattappana Municipality
through well prepared questionnaire. Statistical techniques such as bar
diagram, Pie diagram and were used for analyzing the data.

Kattappana Municipality of Idukki district has been


selected as the sample area for the purpose of the study. Convenience
sampling method was followed for selection of the respondents.

27
3.1 AGE WISE CLASSIFICATION OF BRAND
PREFERENCE OF RESPONDENTS

In this study, respondents were classified on the basis of Age.

Table : 3.1

Table showing age wise classification of respondents.

Age No. of Respondents Percentage


Between 10 – 20 1 2
20 – 30 38 76
30 – 40 5 10
40 – 50 6 12
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

Figure 3.1

Figure showing age wise classification of respondents.

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.

3.2 GENDERWISE CLASSIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS

In this study, respondents were classified on the basis of Gender.

Table : 3.2

Table showing gender wise classification of respondents.

Gender No. of Respondents Percentage


Male 23 46
Female 27 54
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

29
Figure 3.2

Figure showing gender wise classification of respondents.

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.

3.3 MAIN SOURCE OF FAMILY INCOME OF


RESPONDENTS

In this study, respondents were classified on the basis main source of income
of their family.

30
Table : 3.3

Table showing the main source of income of the respondents.

Source of Income No. of Respondents Percentage


Agriculture 13 26
Business 3 6
Agricultural Labourer 2 4
Other Labour 7 14
Government Employee 4 8
Self Employment 8 16
Others 13 26
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

Figure 3.3

Figure showing the main source of income of the respondents.

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.

3.4 AVAILABILITY OF HUL PRODUCTS IN THE


MARKET

In this study, respondents were classified on the basis of the availability of


HUL products in the market.

Table : 3.4

Table showing the availability of HUL products in the market.

Availability No. of Respondents Percentage


Easily available 48 96
Not easily available 2 4
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

32
Figure 3.4

Figure showing the availability of HUL products in the market.

Availability of HUL products


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.

3.5 HUL PRODUCTS USUALLY PREFERED BY


RESPONDENTS

In this study, respondents were classified on the basis of the usually preferred
HUL‘s product by respondents.

33
Table : 3.5

Table showing the usually preferred HUL ‘s product by respondents.

Items No. of Respondents Percentage


Bathing Soap 16 32
Skin care 13 26
Foods 1 2
Deodorants 5 10
Detergent powder 5 10
Tooth paste 10 20
Others 0 0
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

Figure 3.5

Figure showing classification on the basis of the usually preferred HUL ‘s


product by respondents.

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.

3.6 ANNUAL INCOME OF THE RESPONDENTS

In this study, respondents were classified on the basis of the average annual
income of respondents.

Table : 3.6

Table showing the average annual income of respondents.

Income No. of Respondents Percentage


Upto 50,000 10 20
50,000 – 1,00,000 17 34
1,00,001 – 5,00,000 18 36
Above 5,00,000 5 10
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

35
Figure 3.6

Figure showing classification on the basis of the average annual income of


respondents.

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.

3.7 FAMILY SIZE OF THE RESPONDENTS

In this study, respondents were classified on the basis of family size of


respondents.

36
Table : 3.7

Table showing the family size of respondents.

No. of Members No. of Respondents Percentage


1-2 2 4
3–4 27 54
4-5 16 32
Above 5 5 10
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

Figure 3.7

Figure showing classification on the basis of family size of respondents.

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.

3.8 NUMBER OF INCOME EARNING MEMBERS IN


RESPONDENTS FAMILY

In this study, respondents were classified on the basis the number of income
earning individuals in respondent’s family.

Table : 3.8

Table showing the number of income earning individuals in respondent’s


family.

Number No. of Respondents Percentage


1 23 46
2 21 42
3 4 8
More than 3 2 4
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

38
Figure 3.8

Figure showing the number of income earning individuals in respondent’s


family.

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.

3.9 BUYING OUTLETS OF RESPONDENTS

In this study, respondents were classified on the basis the format of purchase
of the respondents.

39
Table : 3.9

Table showing the format of purchase of the respondents.

Format of Purchase No. of Respondents Percentage


Super market 13 26
Departmental Stores 8 16
Retail stores 25 50
Others 4 8
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

Figure 3.9

Figure showing the format of purchase of the respondents.

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.

3.10 FREQUENCY OF CHANGING FMCG BRANDS

In this study, respondents were classified on the basis the frequency of


changing FMCG brands.

Table : 3.10

Table showing the frequency of changing FMCG brands.

Frequency No. of Respondents Percentage


Very frequently 10 20
Sometimes 35 70
Never 5 10
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

41
Figure 3.10

Figure showing the frequency of changing FMCG brands.

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.

3.11 WILLINGNESS TO SPEND PREMIUM PRICE FOR


FMCG BRANDS

In this study, respondents were classified on the basis of willingness to spend


premium price for FMCG brands.

42
Table : 3.11

Table showing the willingness to spend premium price for FMCG brands.

Willingness No. of Respondents Percentage


Willing 28 56
Not Willing 22 44
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

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.

3.12 SOURCES OF FMCG BRAND INFORMATION

In this study, respondents were classified on the basis of sources of FMCG


brand information.

Table : 3.12

Table showing the sources of FMCG brand information.

Sources No. of Respondents Percentage


Family members 4 8
Peers 13 26
TV ads 19 38
Point of sale 9 18
Websites 4 8
Others 1 2
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

44
Figure 3.12

Figure showing the sources of FMCG brand information.

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

From the above figure, it is inferred that 8% of the respondents sources of


FMCG brand information is from Family members, 26% of the respondents
sources of FMCG brand information is from peers, 38% of the respondents
sources of FMCG brand information is from Tv ads, 18% of the respondents
sources of FMCG brand information is from point of sale, 8% of the
respondents sources of FMCG brand information is from websites and 2% of
the respondents sources of FMCG brand information is from Family
members.

45
3.13 SATISFACTION LEVEL OF EXISTING HUL
PRODUCT’S QUALITY

In this study, respondents were classified on the basis satisfaction from


existing HUL product’s quality.

Table : 3.13

Table showing the satisfaction from existing HUL products’ quality.

Satisfaction No. of Respondents Percentage


Satisfied 45 90
Not satisfied 5 10
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

46
Figure 3.13

Figure showing the satisfaction from existing HUL products’ quality.

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.

3.14 FACTORS INFLUENCING THE PRODUCT


SELECTION

In this study, respondents were classified on the basis factors influencing the
product selection.

47
Table : 3.14

Table showing the factors influencing the product selection.

Factors No. of Respondents Percentage


Brand 13 26
Quality 17 34
Price 12 24
Service 8 16
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

Figure 3.14

Figure showing the factors influencing the product selection.

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.

3.15 BRAND PREFERENCE OF RESPONDENTS ON THE


BASIS OF PRICE

3.15.1 SKIN CARE BRANDS

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.

Skin care No. of Respondents Percentage


Ponds 11 22
Garnier 6 12
Himalaya 14 28
Nivea 5 10
Fair and Lovely 14 28
Total 50 100

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.

Hair care No. of Respondents Percentage


Head & Shoulders 16 32
Clinic Plus 17 34
Pantene 9 18
Dheedhi 8 16
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

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

In this study, brand preference of respondents towards detergent powder


brands are classified on the basis of price.

Table : 3.15.3

Table showing the brand preference of respondents towards detergent powder


brands on the basis of price.

Detergent Powder No. of Respondents Percentage


Surf excel 20 40
Tide 8 16
Ariel 15 30
Rin 3 6
Wheel 4 8
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

53
Figure 3.15.3

Figure showing the brand preference of respondents towards detergent


powder brands on the basis of price.

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

Table showing the brand preference of respondents towards Toilet soap


brands on the basis of price.

Toilet Soaps No. of Respondents Percentage


Hamam 8 16
Pears 10 20
Dove 10 20
Cinthol 5 10
Dettol 5 10
Medimix 5 10
Life bouy 7 14
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

55
Figure 3.15.4

Figure showing the brand preference of respondents towards Toilet soap


brands on the basis of price.

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

Table showing the brand preference of respondents towards Tooth paste


brands on the basis of price.

Tooth paste No. of Respondents Percentage


Colgate 20 40
Close up 11 22
Pepsodent 8 16
K.P Namboothiri’s 11 22
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

57
Figure 3.15.5

Figure showing the brand preference of respondents towards Tooth paste


brands on the basis of price.

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

In this study, brand preference of respondents towards deodorants brands are


classified on the basis of price.

Table : 3.15.6

Table showing the brand preference of respondents towards deodorants


brands on the basis of price.

Deodorants No. of Respondents Percentage


Rexona 10 20
Axe 15 30
Fogg 9 18
Denver 7 14
Engage 9 18
Total 50 100

Source: Primary Data

59
Figure 3.15.6

Figure showing the brand preference of respondents towards deodorants


brands on the basis of price.

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

CHI – SQUARE TEST

Chi- square test:

Chi- Square test is a non-parametric test it can be used to find


out whether one or more attributes are associated or not. Karl Pearson’s has
developed a method to test the difference between the theoretical (hypothesis)
and observed value.

H0: There is no significant relation between quality and price of HUL


products.

H1: There is significant relation between quality and price of HUL products.

Quality Brand preference on the basis of price

Skin Hair Detergent Toilet Tooth Deodorants Total


care care powder soap paste
Satisfied

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

O E (O-E) (O-E)2 (O-E)2/E


7 3.5 3.5 12.25 3.57
12 6 6 36 6
8 4 4 16 4
12 6 6 36 6
3 1.5 1.5 2.25 1.5
8 4 4 16 4
Σ(O-E)2/E= 25.07

Chi square= Σ(O-E)2/E = 25.07

Calculated value = 25.07

Degree of freedom = n-1

ie,= 6-1=5

Level of significance = 0.05 ie, Table value = 11.070

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

FINDINGS, SUGGESTIONS &


CONCLUSION

63
FINDINGS

MAJOR FINDINGS

 Most of the customers has easy availability of HUL products in their


market.
 Most preferred HUL products by customers are bathing soaps and skin
care products.
 The income of respondents does not affect the HUL brand preference.
 Majority of respondents has 1 or 2 income earning individuals in their
family.
 Majority of respondents buying outlet is retail shops.
 Majority of respondents change their FMCG brands sometimes only.
 Majority of respondents are willing to spend premium price for FMCG
brands.
 Most of the respondents source of brand information is from tv ads.
 Majority of respondents are satisfied with the existing HUL product’s
quality.
 Majority of respondents select product on the basis of quality.
 The most preferred skin care products by the respondents are Himalaya
and Fair & Lovely.
 The most preferred hair care product by the respondents is Clinic Plus.
 The most preferred detergent powder brand by the respondents is Surf
excel.
 The most preferred toilet soaps by the respondents are Pears and
Dove.
 The most preferred tooth paste brand by the respondents is Colgate.

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

2. Quantitative Techniques for business research

- L.R Potti

Magazines

1. Business World

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

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:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy