INTRODUCTION

MEANING AND DEFINITION

Marketing is a form of communication between a business house and its customers with the goal

of selling its products or Demands to them. Goods are not complete products until they are in the hands

of customers. Marketing is that management process through which goods and Demands move from

concept to the customer. Marketing has less to do with getting customers to pay for a product as it does

with developing a demand for that product and fulfilling the customer’s needs.

According to the American Marketing Association (AMA) Board of Directors,

Marketing is the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating,

delivering, and exchanging offerings that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society

at large.

Dr. Philip Kotler defines marketing as “the science and art of exploring, creating and delivering

value to satisfy the needs of a target market at a profit. Marketing identifies unfulfilled needs and desires.

It defines, measures and quantifies the size of the identified market and the profit potential. It pinpoints

which segments the company is capable of serving best and it designs and promotes the appropriate

products and Demands.”

Thus, marketing refers to all the activities involved in the creation of place, time, possession and

awareness utilities and beyond.

MARKETING CONCEPTS- TRADITIONAL AND MODERN

Concept is a philosophy, attitude, a line of thinking, an idea or notion to relating any aspects of divine and

human creations. The philosophy of an organization in the dynamic creation of marketing is referred to as

a marketing concept. Thus, marketing concept is a way of life in which the resources of an organization

are mobilized to create, stimulate and satisfy the consumer at a profit.

TRADITIONAL/ CLASSICAL CONCEPT

According to this concept, marketing consists of those activities which are concerned with the transfer of

ownership of goods from producers to consumers. Here, the role of physical distribution and marketing

channels is over emphasized. It refers to marketing as the process by which goods are made available to

ultimate consumers from their place of origin. The emphasis of marketing is on sale of goods and

Demands. Consumer satisfaction is overlooked.

MODERN CONCEPT

According to this concept, marketing is concerned with the creation of consumers. According to the

modern thinker Peter Drucker, Marketing is so basic that it cannot be considered as a separate function.

It is the whole business seen from the customers’ point of view…business success is not determined by

the producer but the customer.

Thus, the modern concept lays greater emphasis on customers and considers them as kings. Marketing is

not merely a physical process but is something beyond that. It is the managerial philosophy which centres

around the wants and desires of customers.

TRADITIONAL CONCEPT vs. MODERN CONCEPT

1. Traditional marketing starts from production and ends with sale but modern marketing

includes planning, product, price, promotion, place, people, after sale Demand etc.

2. Traditional marketing concentrate on favorable products, but modern marketing

concentrates on customer needs, wants and satisfaction.

3. In traditional marketing, only those products are sold which the producer produces. No

focus is laid on consumer preference. On the other hand, modern marketing indulge in

production only after analyzing consumer demands.

4. Traditional marketing is product and production oriented while modern marketing is

consumer oriented.

5. The target of traditional marketers was to earn maximum profit by maximizing sales. But,
 the main motive of modern marketers is to earn profits through satisfaction of consumer

needs.

6. The principle of traditional market was “caveat emptor” i.e., “let the buyer beware”.

Whereas, the principle followed by modern market is “caveat venditor” i.e., “let the

vendor beware”.

SELLING vs. MARKETING

MARKETING SELLING

1. It begins before sale and continues after 1. It begins after production and ends with

sale. the sale.

2. It focuses on consumer needs. 2. It focuses on seller’s needs.

3. It has long term perspective aiming for 3. It has short-term perspective.

growth and stability. 4. It is a routine day to day physical

4. It is a philosophy of business. process.

5. Here, customer comes first, then 5. Here, product comes first, then

product. customers.

6. It has wider scope. 6. Its scope is narrower as compared to

marketing.

It is a common error committed when people say they are going for marketing when they actually go to

the market to purchase goods/ Demands. Well, it is simply buying from consumers’ end and selling from

the sellers’ end. Marketing is a wider term than selling. Let us now see how selling differs from market

Thus, from the above table the distinction of marketing from selling can be understood.
FUNCTIONS OF MARKETING

Marketing functions are those specialized activities that a marketer must perform in order to identify and

source potentially successful products for the market place and then promote them by differentiating them

from similar products. The important functions of marketing are discussed briefly below:

1. Research & Development Function- A marketer has to carry out adequate research to

identify the size, behavior, culture, gender, demands etc. of the target market segment,

and then develop the products/Demands accordingly to meet and satisfy the needs of

target customers.

2. Buying Function- The marketing department has to assist the purchase and supply

department by sending specifications of the materials required so as to get timely and

quality materials for production.

3. Standardization & Grading- Standardization means setting quality standards to

achieve uniformity in the product. It provides consistent quality assurance to consumers.

Grading means classifying the product on certain accepted benchmarks or bases such as

size, quality etc. Through grading, the marketer can get higher price for quality product.

4. Packaging and Labeling- Packaging is traditionally done to protect the goods from

damage in transit and to facilitate easy transfer of goods to customers. But now it is also

used by the manufacturer to establish his brand image as distinct from those of his rivals.

Another activity involved with packaging is labeling. It means putting identification

marks on the package. Label is that part of a product which contains information about

the producer and the product.

5. Branding- It is the process of stamping a product with some identification name or mark

or a combination of both. Branding means giving a distinct individuality to a product.

Some popular brands are Airtel, Sony, Lux, Nirma etc.

6. Pricing- Determination of price of a product is an important task of a marketing

manager. Price is influenced by cost of product and Demand offered, profit margin
 desired, prices fixed by rival firms, government policy, etc.

7. Promotion Function- The marketing manager must design adequate strategies to make

known to consumers about the availability of products in the market. Without this

function, products will remain in the hands of producers and will never reach the

consumers. Four important methods of promotion are advertising, personal selling,

publicity and sales promotion.

8. Physical Distribution- This function involves the activities which are necessary to

transfer ownership of goods to customers and also making available goods at the right

place and time.

9. Transportation- It provides the physical needs which facilitate the movement of

persons, goods and Demands from one place to another.

10. Warehousing- To meet the expected demands of consumers, goods are produced or

procured well in advance and stored in warehouses till they are transferred to customers.

Warehouses protect the goods from any damage which may be caused by any rodents,

moisture, sun, theft, etc.

11. Risk- taking function- Risks are involved in almost all levels of marketing process. Risk

taking in marketing refers to the financial risk that is inherent in producing and handling

goods, including the possible loss due to a fall in prices and the losses from spoilage,

depreciation, obsolescence, fire and floods etc.

12. Customer Support Demands- This function relates to developing customer support

Demands such as after sales Demands, handling customer complaints and adjustments,

providing credit facilities, maintenance Demands, technical Demands etc. These

Demands provide maximum customer satisfaction and develop brand loyalty for a

product.

All the above, and in some situations, more other functions are performed by the marketing manager.
MARKETING MIX- THE 7 Ps of MARKETING
Marketing mix represents a blending of decisions in few areas for the satisfaction of the needs of

customers. E.J. McCarthy had formerly given four elements of Marketing Mix. These include:

(1) Product, (2) Price, (3) Promotion, and (4) Place or Physical Distribution. These elements are popularly

called the “four Ps of Marketing Mix”. As marketing became a more sophisticated discipline, one more

element was added to these 4 Ps- People. Later on two more Ps were added, especially for the Demand

sector, viz., Process and Physical evidence. . These elements are inter- related because decisions in one

area usually affect actions in the others. The blend or mixture of these elements are often referred to as

Marketing Mix. It basically concentrates on the target consumers. Let us have a brief discussion of the

above mentioned elements-

MARKETING MIX

1. Product: It involves planning, developing and producing the right type of products

and Demands to be offered by the firm to the customers. It deals with the product

range, design, durability, branding, packaging, color and other features.

2. Price: A product is only worth what a customer is willing to pay for it. The marketing

manager must determine the price in such a way that it covers the cost of production

and distribution of the product and a reasonable margin of profit. Other variables

influencing price are the price fixed by competitors, government regulation etc. It is

the only element of marketing mix that generates revenue- everything else represents a

cost.

3. Promotion: It deals with informing the customers about the firm’s product and

persuading them to purchase the same through personal selling, advertising, publicity

and sales promotion.

4. Place or Physical distribution: It is concerned with making the product/Demand

available to the customers at the right place, at the right time and in the right quantity.

The place where the customers buy a product and the means of distributing the

product to that place must be appropriate and convenient to the customers.

5. People: It generally refers to the employees of the business organization who deal

with the customers.

 INDUSTRY PROFILE

with sand and gravel, produces concrete. Concrete is the most widely used material in existence and

is behind only water as the planet's most-consumed resource.[2]

Cements used in construction are usually inorganic, often lime- or calcium silicate-based, and are

either hydraulic or less commonly non-hydraulic, depending on the ability of the Cement to set in

the presence of water (see hydraulic and non-hydraulic lime plaster).

Hydraulic Cements (e.g., Portland Cement) set and become adhesive through a chemical

reaction between the dry ingredients and water. The chemical reaction results in mineral hydrates that

are not very water-soluble. This allows setting in wet conditions or under water and further protects

the hardened material from chemical attack. The chemical process for hydraulic Cement was found

by ancient Romans who used volcanic ash (pozzolana) with added lime (calcium oxide).

Non-hydraulic Cement (less common) does not set in wet conditions or under water. Rather, it sets

as it dries and reacts with carbon dioxide in the air. It is resistant to attack by chemicals after setting.

The word "Cement" can be traced back to the Ancient Roman term opus caementicium, used to

describe masonry resembling modern concrete that was made from crushed rock with burnt lime as

binder.[3] The volcanic ash and pulverized brick supplements that were added to the burnt lime, to

obtain a hydraulic binder, were later referred to as Cementum, cimentum, cäment, and Cement. In

modern times, organic polymers are sometimes used as Cements in concrete.

World production of Cement is about 4.4 billion tonnes per year (2021, estimation), [4][5] of which

about half is made in China, followed by India and Vietnam.

The Cement production process is responsible for nearly 8% (2018) of global

CO2 emissions,[5] which includes heating raw materials in a Cement kiln by fuel combustion and

release of CO2 stored in the calcium carbonate (the calcination process). Its hydrated products, such

as concrete, gradually reabsorb atmospheric CO2 (carbonation process), compensating for

approximately 30% of the initial CO2 emissions.

Chemistry

Cement materials can be classified into two distinct categories: hydraulic Cements and non-hydraulic

Cements according to their respective setting and hardening mechanisms. Hydraulic Cement setting

and hardening involves hydration reactions and therefore requires water, while non-hydraulic

Cements only react with a gas and can directly set under air.

Hydraulic Cement

Clinker nodules produced by sintering at 1450 °C

By far the most common type of Cement is hydraulic Cement, which hardens by hydration (when

water is added) of the clinker minerals. Hydraulic Cements (such as Portland Cement) are made of a

mixture of silicates and oxides, the four main mineral phases of the clinker, abbreviated in

the Cement chemist notation, being:

C3S: alite (3CaO·SiO2);

C2S: belite (2CaO·SiO2);

C3A: tricalcium aluminate (3CaO·Al2O3) (historically, and still occasionally, called celite);

C4AF: brownmillerite (4CaO·Al2 O3·Fe2O3).

The silicates are responsible for the Cement's mechanical properties — the tricalcium

aluminate and brownmillerite are essential for the formation of the liquid phase

during the sintering (firing) process of clinker at high temperature in the kiln. The

chemistry of these reactions is not completely clear and is still the object of

research.[8]
 First, the limestone (calcium carbonate) is burned to remove its carbon,

producing lime (calcium oxide) in what is known as a calcination reaction. This

single chemical reaction is a major emitter of global carbon dioxide emissions.[9]

CaCO3 → CaO + CO2

The lime reacts with silicon dioxide to produce dicalcium silicate and tricalcium

silicate.

2CaO + SiO2 → 2CaO.SiO2

3CaO + SiO2 → 3CaO.SiO2

The lime also reacts with aluminium oxide to form tricalcium aluminate.

3CaO + Al2 O3 → 3CaO.Al2O3

In the last step, calcium oxide, aluminium oxide, and ferric oxide

react together to form brownmillerite.

4CaO + Al2 O3 + Fe2O3 → 4CaO.Al2 O3.F

Non-hydraulic Cement

Calcium oxide obtained by thermal decomposition of calcium carbonate at high temperature (above

825 °C).A less common form of Cement is non-hydraulic Cement, such as slaked lime (calcium

oxide mixed with water), which hardens by carbonation in contact with carbon dioxide, which is

present in the air (~ 412 vol. ppm ≃ 0.04 vol. %). First calcium oxide (lime) is produced

from calcium carbonate (limestone or chalk) by calcination at temperatures above 825 °C (1,517 °F)
for about 10 hours at atmospheric pressure:

CaCO3 → CaO + CO2

The calcium oxide is then spent (slaked) by mixing it with water to make slaked lime (calcium

hydroxide):CaO + H2O → Ca(OH)2

Once the excess water is completely evaporated (this process is technically called setting), the

carbonation startsCa(OH)2 + CO2 → CaCO3 + H2O

History

Perhaps the earliest known occurrence of Cement is from twelve million years ago. A deposit of

Cement was formed after an occurrence of oil shale located adjacent to a bed of limestone burned by

natural causes. These ancient deposits were investigated in the 1960s and 1970s. [10]

Ancient Greece and Rome: Lime (calcium oxide) was used on Crete and by the Ancient Greeks.

There is evidence that the Minoans of Crete used crushed potsherds as an artificial pozzolan for

hydraulic Cement.[11] Nobody knows who first discovered that a combination of hydrated non-

hydraulic lime and a pozzolan produces a hydraulic mixture (see also: Pozzolanic reaction), but such

concrete was used by the Greeks, specifically the Ancient Macedonians,[12][13] and three centuries

later on a large scale by Roman engineers.

There is... a kind of powder which from natural causes produces astonishing results. It is found in the

neighborhood of Baiae and in the country belonging to the towns round about Mount Vesuvius. This

substance when mixed with lime and rubble not only lends strength to buildings of other kinds but

even when piers of it are constructed in the sea, they set hard underwater.

Marcus Vitruvius Pollio, Liber II, De Architectura, Chapter VI "Pozzolana" Sec. 1

The Greeks used volcanic tuff from the island of Thera as their pozzolan and the Romans used

crushed volcanic ash (activated aluminium silicates) with lime. This mixture could set under water,

increasing its resistance to corrosion like rust. [17] The material was called pozzolana from the town

of Pozzuoli, west of Naples where volcanic ash was extracted.[18] In the absence of pozzolanicash, the

Romans used powdered brick or pottery as a substitute and they may have used crushed tiles for this
purpose before discovering natural sources near Rome. [11] The huge dome of the Pantheon in Rome

and the massive Baths of Caracalla are examples of ancient structures made from these concretes,

any of which still stand. The vast system of Roman aqueducts also made extensive use of hydraulic

Cement.[20] Roman concrete was rarely used on the outside of buildings. The normal technique was to

use brick facing material as the formwork for an infill of mortar mixed with an aggregate of broken

pieces of stone, brick, potsherds, recycled chunks of concrete, or other building rubble. [21]

Mesoamerica: Lightweight concrete was designed and used for the construction of structural

elements by the pre-Columbian builders who lived in a very advanced civilization in El Tajin near

Mexico City, in Mexico. A detailed study of the composition of the aggregate and binder show that

the aggregate was pumice and the binder was a pozzolanic Cement made with volcanic ash and lime

Middle Ages: Any preservation of this knowledge in literature from the Middle Ages is unknown,

but medieval masons and some military engineers actively used hydraulic Cement in structures such

as canals, fortresses, harbors, and shipbuilding facilities.[23][24] A mixture of lime mortar and

aggregate with brick or stone facing material was used in the Eastern Roman Empire as well as in the

West into the Gothic period. The German Rhineland continued to use hydraulic mortar throughout

the Middle Ages, having local pozzolana deposits called trass.[21]

16th century

Tabby is a building material made from oyster shell lime, sand, and whole oyster shells to form a

concrete. The Spanish introduced it to the Americas and the Philippines in the sixteenth century. [25]

18th century

The technical knowledge for making hydraulic Cement was formalized by French and British

engineers in the 18th century.[23]John Smeaton made an important contribution to the development of

Cements while planning the construction of the third Eddystone Lighthouse (1755–59) in the English

Channel now known as Smeaton's Tower. He needed a hydraulic mortar that would set and develop

some strength in the twelve-hour period between successive high tides. He performed experiments

with combinations of different limestones and additives including trass and pozzolanas] and did

exhaustive market research on the available hydraulic limes, visiting their production sites, and noted
that the "hydraulicity" of the lime was directly related to the clay content of the limestone used to

make it. Smeaton was a civil engineer by profession, and took the idea no further. In the South

Atlantic seaboard of the United States, tabby relying on the oyster-shell middens of earlier Native

American populations was used in house construction from the 1730s to the 1860s. [25] In Britain

particularly, good quality building stone became ever more expensive during a period of rapid

growth, and it became a common practice to construct prestige buildings from the new industrial

bricks, and to finish them with a stucco to imitate stone. Hydraulic limes were favored for this, but

the need for a fast set time encouraged the development of new Cements. Most famous was Parker's

"Roman Cement".[26] This was developed by James Parker in the 1780s, and finally patented in 1796.

It was, in fact, nothing like material used by the Romans, but was a "natural Cement" made by

burning septaria – nodules that are found in certain clay deposits, and that contain both clay

minerals and calcium carbonate. The burnt nodules were ground to a fine powder. This product,

made into a mortar with sand, set in 5–15 minutes. The success of "Roman Cement" led other

manufacturers to develop rival products by burning artificial hydraulic lime Cements

of clay and chalk. Roman Cement quickly became popular but was largely replaced by Portland

Cement in the 1850s.

19th century: Apparently unaware of Smeaton's work, the same principle was identified by

Frenchman Louis Vicat in the first decade of the nineteenth century. Vicat went on to devise a

method of combining chalk and clay into an intimate mixture, and, burning this, produced an

"artificial Cement" in 1817[27] considered the "principal forerunner"[11] of Portland Cement and

"...Edgar Dobbs of Southwark patented a Cement of this kind in 1811. In Russia, Egor

Cheliev created a new binder by mixing lime and clay. His results were published in 1822 in his

book A Treatise on the Art to Prepare a Good Mortar published in St. Petersburg. A few years later

in 1825, he published another book, which described various methods of making Cement and

concrete, and the benefits of Cement in the construction of buildings and embankments.
William Aspdin is considered the inventor of "modern" Portland Cement.[3

Portland Cement, the most common type of Cement in general use around the world as a basic

ingredient of concrete, mortar, stucco, and non-speciality grout, was developed in England in the mid

19th century, and usually originates from limestone. James Frost produced what he called "British

Cement" in a similar manner around the same time, but did not obtain a patent until 1822. [31] In

1824, Joseph Aspdin patented a similar material, which he called Portland Cement, because the

render made from it was in color similar to the prestigious Portland stone quarried on the Isle of

Portland, Dorset, England. However, Aspdins' Cement was nothing like modern Portland Cement but

was a first step in its development, called a proto-Portland Cement.[11] Joseph Aspdins' son William

Aspdin had left his father's company and in his Cement manufacturing apparently accidentally

produced calcium silicates in the 1840s, a middle step in the development of Portland Cement.

William Aspdin's innovation was counterintuitive for manufacturers of "artificial Cements", because

they required more lime in the mix (a problem for his father), a much higher kiln temperature (and

therefore more fuel), and the resulting clinker was very hard and rapidly wore down the millstones,

which were the only available grinding technology of the time. Manufacturing costs were therefore

considerably higher, but the product set reasonably slowly and developed strength quickly, thus

opening up a market for use in concrete. The use of concrete in construction grew rapidly from 1850

onward, and was soon the dominant use for Cements. Thus Portland Cement began its predominant

role. Isaac Charles Johnson further refined the production of meso-Portland Cement (middle stage of

development) and claimed he was the real father of Portland Cement.[32]

Setting time and "early strength" are important characteristics of Cements. This was what we call

today "modern" Portland Cement. Because of the air of mystery with which William Aspdin

surrounded his product, others (e.g., Vicat and Johnson) have claimed precedence in this invention,

but recent analysis[33] of both his concrete and raw Cement have shown that William Aspdin's

product made at Northfleet Cement Works, Kent was a true alite-based Cement. However, Aspdin's

methods were "rule-of-thumb": Vicat is responsible for establishing the chemical basis of these

Cements, and Johnson established the importance of sintering the mix in the kiln.

In the US the first large-scale use of Cement was Rosendale Cement, a natural Cement mined from a

massive deposit of dolomite discovered in the early 19th century near Rosendale, New York.

Rosendale Cement was extremely popular for the foundation of buildings (e.g., Statue of

Liberty, Capitol Building, Brooklyn Bridge) and lining water pipes.[34] Sorel Cement, or magnesia-

based Cement, was patented in 1867 by the Frenchman Stanislas Sorel.[35] It was stronger than

Portland Cement but its poor water resistance (leaching) and corrosive properties (pitting

corrosion due to the presence of leachable chloride anions and the low pH (8.5–9.5) of its pore water)

limited its use as reinforced concrete for building construction. The next development in the

manufacture of Portland Cement was the introduction of the rotary kiln. It produced a clinker mixture

that was both stronger, because more alite (C3S) is formed at the higher temperature it achieved

(1450 °C), and more homogeneous. Because raw material is constantly fed into a rotary kiln, it

allowed a continuous manufacturing process to replace lower capacity batch production processes.[11]

20th century

Workers bagging Cement in a factory in Scotland, 1918The National Cement Share Company

of Ethiopia's new plant in Dire Dawa Calcium aluminate Cements were patented in 1908 in France
by Jules Bied for better resistance to sulfates. [37] Also in 1908, Thomas Edison experimented with

pre-cast concrete in houses in Union, N.J.

In the US, after World War One, the long curing time of at least a month for Rosendale Cement made

it unpopular for constructing highways and bridges, and many states and construction firms turned to

Portland Cement. Because of the switch to Portland Cement, by the end of the 1920s only one of the

15 Rosendale Cement companies had survived. But in the early 1930s, builders discovered that,

while Portland Cement set faster, it was not as durable, especially for highways—to the point that

some states stopped building highways and roads with Cement. Bertrain H. Wait, an engineer whose

company had helped construct the New York

City's Catskill Aqueduct, was impressed with the durability of Rosendale Cement, and came up with

a blend of both Rosendale and Portland Cements that had the good attributes of both. It was highly

durable and had a much faster setting time. Wait convinced the New York Commissioner of

Highways to construct an experimental section of highway near New Paltz, New York, using one

sack of Rosendale to six sacks of Portland Cement. It was a success, and for decades the Rosendale-

Portland Cement blend was used in concrete highway and concrete bridge construction.[34]

Cementitious materials have been used as a nuclear waste immobilizing matrix for more than a half-

century.[39] Technologies of waste Cementation have been developed and deployed at industrial scale

in many countries. Cementitious wasteforms require a careful selection and design process adapted to

each specific type of waste to satisfy the strict waste acceptance criteria for long-term storage and

disposal.[40]

Types

 Modern development of hydraulic Cement began with the start of the Industrial

Revolution (around 1800), driven by three main needs:

 Hydraulic Cement render (stucco) for finishing brick buildings in wet climates

 Hydraulic mortars for masonry construction of harbor works, etc., in contact with sea water

 Development of strong concretes

  Modern Cements are often Portland Cement or Portland Cement blends, but other Cement

blends are used in some industrial settings.

Portland Cement

Main article: Portland Cement

Portland Cement, a form of hydraulic Cement, is by far the most common type of Cement in general

use around the world. The most common use for Portland Cement is to make concrete. Portland

Cement may be grey or white.

Portland Cement blend

Portland Cement blends are often available as inter-ground mixtures from Cement producers, but

similar formulations are often also mixed from the ground components at the concrete mixing plant.

Portland blast-furnace slag Cement, or blast furnace Cement (ASTM C595 and EN 197-1

nomenclature respectively), contains up to 95% ground granulated blast furnace slag, with the rest

Portland clinker and a little gypsum. All compositions produce high ultimate strength, but as slag

content is increased, early strength is reduced, while sulfate resistance increases and heat evolution

diminishes. Used as an economic alternative to Portland sulfate-resisting and low-heat Cements.

Portland-fly ash Cement contains up to 40% fly ash under ASTM standards (ASTM C595), or 35%

under EN standards (EN 197–1). The fly ash is pozzolanic, so that ultimate strength is maintained.

Because fly ash addition allows a lower concrete water content, early strength can also be

maintained. Where good quality cheap fly ash is available, this can be an economic alternative to

ordinary Portland Cement.[44]

Portland pozzolan Cement includes fly ash Cement, since fly ash is a pozzolan, but also includes

Cements made from other natural or artificial pozzolans. In countries where volcanic ashes are

available (e.g., Italy, Chile, Mexico, the Philippines), these Cements are often the most common form

in use. The maximum replaCement ratios are generally defined as for Portland-fly ash Cement.

Portland silica fume Cement. Addition of silica fume can yield exceptionally high strengths, and
Cements containing 5–20% silica fume are occasionally produced, with 10% being the maximum

allowed addition under EN 197–1. However, silica fume is more usually added to Portland Cement at

the concrete mixer.

Masonry Cements are used for preparing bricklaying mortars and stuccos, and must not be used in

concrete. They are formulated to yield workable mortars that allow rapid and consistent masonry

work. Subtle variations of masonry Cement in North America are plastic Cements and stucco

Cements. These are designed to produce a controlled bond with masonry blocks.

This Cement can make concrete for floor slabs (up to 60 m square) without contraction joints.

White blended Cements may be made using white clinker (containing little or no iron) and white

supplementary materials such as high-purity metakaolin. Colored Cements serve decorative

purposes.

Some standards allow the addition of pigments to produce colored Portland Cement. Other standards

(e.g., ASTM) do not allow pigments in Portland Cement, and colored Cements are sold as blended

hydraulic Cements.

Very finely ground Cements are Cement mixed with sand or with slag or other pozzolan type

minerals that are extremely finely ground together. Such Cements can have the same physical

characteristics as normal Cement but with 50% less Cement, particularly because there is more

surface area for the chemical reaction. Even with intensive grinding they can use up to 50% less

energy (and thus less carbon emissions) to fabricate than ordinary Portland Cements.

Other

Pozzolan-lime Cements are mixtures of ground pozzolan and lime. These are the Cements the

Romans used, and are present in surviving Roman structures like the Pantheon in Rome. They

develop strength slowly, but their ultimate strength can be very high. The hydration products that

produce strength are essentially the same as those in Portland Cement.

Slag-lime Cements—ground granulated blast-furnace slag—are not hydraulic on their own, but are
"activated" by addition of alkalis, most economically using lime. They are similar to pozzolan lime

Cements in their properties.

Calcium sulfoaluminate Cements are made from clinkers that include ye'elimite (Ca4(AlO2)6SO4 or

4A3S in Cement chemist's notation) as a primary phase. They are used in expansive Cements, in ultra-

high early strength Cements, and in "low-energy" Cements. Hydration produces ettringite, and

specialized physical properties (such as expansion or rapid reaction) are obtained by adjustment of

the availability of calcium and sulfate ions. In addition, the lower limestone content and lower fuel

consumption leads to a CO

2 emission around half that associated with Portland clinker. However, SO 2 emissions are usually

significantly higher.

"Natural" Cements corresponding to certain Cements of the pre-Portland era, are produced by

burning argillaceous limestones at moderate temperatures. The level of clay components in the

limestone (around 30–35%) is such that large amounts of belite (the low-early strength, high-late

strength mineral in Portland Cement) are formed without the formation of excessive amounts of free

lime. As with any natural material, such Cements have highly variable properties.

Geopolymer Cements are made from mixtures of water-soluble alkali metal silicates, and

aluminosilicate mineral powders such as fly ash and metakaolin.

Polymer Cements are made from organic chemicals that polymerise. Producers often

use thermoset materials. While they are often significantly more expensive, they can give a water

proof material that has useful tensile strength. Sorel Cement is a hard, durable Cement made by

combining magnesium oxide and a magnesium chloride solution

Fiber mesh Cement or fiber reinforced concrete is Cement that is made up of fibrous materials like

synthetic fibers, glass fibers, natural fibers, and steel fibers. This type of mesh is distributed evenly

throughout the wet concrete. The purpose of fiber mesh is to reduce water loss from the concrete as

well as enhance its structural integrity.[49] When used in plasters, fiber mesh increases cohesiveness,

tensile strength, impact resistance, and to reduce shrinkage; ultimately, the main purpose of these
combined properties is to reduce cracking.[50]

Electric Cement is proposed to be made by recycling Cement from demolition wastes in an electric

arc furnace as part of a steelmaking process.

The recycled Cement is intended to be used to replace part or all of the lime used in steelmaking,

resulting in a slag-like material that is similar in mineralogy to Portland Cement, eliminating most of

the associated carbon emissions.[51]

Manufacture

Portland Cement is made by heating limestone (calcium carbonate) with other materials (such

as clay) to 1,450 °C (2,640 °F) in a kiln, in a process known as calcination that liberates a molecule

of carbon dioxide from the calcium carbonate to form calcium oxide, or quicklime, which then

chemically combines with the other materials in the mix to form calcium silicates and other

Cementitious compounds. The resulting hard substance, called 'clinker', is then ground with a small

amount of gypsum (CaSO4·2H2O) into a powder to make ordinary Portland Cement, the most

commonly used type of Cement (often referred to as OPC). Portland Cement is a basic ingredient

of concrete, mortar, and most non-specialty grout.

Setting, hardening and curing

Cement starts to set when mixed with water, which causes a series of hydration chemical reactions.

The interlocking of the hydrates gives Cement its strength. Contrary to popular belief, hydraulic

Cement does not set by drying out — proper curing requires maintaining the appropriate moisture

content necessary for the hydration reactions during the setting and the hardening processes. If

hydraulic Cements dry out during the curing phase, the resulting product can be insufficiently

hydrated and significantly weakened.

A minimum temperature of 5 °C is recommended, and no more than 30 °C.[52] The concrete at young

age must be protected against water evaporation due to direct insolation, elevated temperature,

low relative humidity and wind.

The interfacial transition zone (ITZ) is a region of the Cement paste around the aggregate particles

in concrete.

In the zone, a gradual transition in the microstructural features occurs.[53] This zone can be up to 35

micrometer wide.[54]: 351 Other studies have shown that the width can be up to 50 micrometer. The

average content of unreacted clinker phase decreases and porosity decreases towards the aggregate

surface. Similarly, the content of ettringite increases in ITZ.

Safety issues

Bags of Cement routinely have health and safety warnings printed on them because not only is

Cement highly alkaline, but the setting process is exothermic. As a result, wet Cement is

strongly caustic (pH = 13.5) and can easily cause severe skin burns if not promptly washed off with

water. Similarly, dry Cement powder in contact with mucous membranes can cause severe eye or

respiratory irritation.

Some trace elements, such as chromium, from impurities naturally present in the raw materials used

to produce Cement may cause allergic dermatitis. Reducing agents such as ferrous sulfate (FeSO4)

are often added to Cement to convert the carcinogenic hexavalent chromate (CrO42−) into trivalent

chromium (Cr3+), a less toxic chemical species. Cement users need also to wear appropriate gloves

and protective clothing.[56]

Cement industry in the world

Global Cement production in 2022Global Cement capacity in 2022See also: List of countries by

Cement production and Cement industry in the United States

In 2010, the world production of hydraulic Cement was 3,300 megatonnes (3,600×106 short tons).

The top three producers were China with 1,800, India with 220, and the United States with 63.5

million tonnes for a total of over half the world total by the world's three most populated states. [57]

For the world capacity to produce Cement in 2010, the situation was similar with the top three states

(China, India, and the US) accounting for just under half the world total capacity. [58]

Over 2011 and 2012, global consumption continued to climb, rising to 3585 Mt in 2011 and 3736 Mt

in 2012, while annual growth rates eased to 8.3% and 4.2%, respectively.

China, representing an increasing share of world Cement consumption, remains the main engine of

global growth. By 2012, Chinese demand was recorded at 2160 Mt, representing 58% of world

consumption. Annual growth rates, which reached 16% in 2010, appear to have softened, slowing to

5–6% over 2011 and 2012, as China's economy targets a more sustainable growth rate.

Outside of China, worldwide consumption climbed by 4.4% to 1462 Mt in 2010, 5% to 1535 Mt in

2011, and finally 2.7% to 1576 Mt in 2012.

The performance in North America and Europe over the 2010–12 period contrasted strikingly with

that of China, as the 2008 financial crisis evolved into a sovereign debt crisis for many economies in

this region[clarification needed] and recession. Cement consumption levels for this region fell by 1.9% in

2010 to 445 Mt, recovered by 4.9% in 2011, then dipped again by 1.1% in 2012.

The performance in the rest of the world, which includes many emerging economies in Asia, Africa

and Latin America and representing some 1020 Mt Cement demand in 2010, was positive and more

than offset the declines in North America and Europe. Annual consumption growth was recorded at
7.4% in 2010, moderating to 5.1% and 4.3% in 2011 and 2012, respectively.

As at year-end 2012, the global Cement industry consisted of 5673 Cement production facilities,

including both integrated and grinding, of which 3900 were located in China and 1773 in the rest of

the world.

Total Cement capacity worldwide was recorded at 5245 Mt in 2012, with 2950 Mt located in China

and 2295 Mt in the rest of the world. [6]

China

Main article: Cement industry in China

China is the world's largest producer and user of Cement.

In 2006, it was estimated that China manufactured 1.235 billion tonnes of Cement, which was 44% of

the world total Cement production.[61] "Demand for Cement in China is expected to advance 5.4%

annually and exceed 1 billion tonnes in 2008, driven by slowing but healthy growth in construction

expenditures. Cement consumed in China will amount to 44% of global demand, and China will

remain the world's largest national consumer of Cement by a large margin."[62]

In 2010, 3.3 billion tonnes of Cement was consumed globally. Of this, China accounted for 1.8

billion tonnes.[63]

Environmental impacts

Cement manufacture causes environmental impacts at all stages of the process. These include

emissions of airborne pollution in the form of dust, gases, noise and vibration when operating

machinery and during blasting in quarries, and damage to countryside from quarrying. Equipment to

reduce dust emissions during quarrying and manufacture of Cement is widely used, and equipment to

trap and separate exhaust gases are coming into increased use. Environmental protection also

includes the re-integration of quarries into the countryside after they have been closed down by

returning them to nature or re-cultivating them.

CO
Carbon concentration in Cement spans from ≈5% in Cement structures to ≈8% in the case of roads in

Cement.

Cement manufacturing releases CO2 in the atmosphere both directly when calcium carbonate is

heated, producing lime and carbon dioxide, and also indirectly through the use of energy if its

production involves the emission of CO

The Cement industry produces about 10% of global human-made CO

2 emissions, of which 60% is from the chemical process, and 40% from burning fuel. [67] A Chatham

House study from 2018 estimates that the 4 billion tonnes of Cement produced annually account for

8% of worldwide CO

2 emissions. The majority of carbon dioxide emissions in the manufacture of Portland Cement

(approximately 60%) are produced from the chemical decomposition of limestone to lime, an

ingredient in Portland Cement clinker. These emissions may be reduced by lowering the clinker

content of Cement. They can also be reduced by alternative fabrication methods such as the

intergrinding Cement with sand or with slag or other pozzolan type minerals to a very fine powder. [69]

To reduce the transport of heavier raw materials and to minimize the associated costs, it is more

economical to build Cement plants closer to the limestone quarries rather than to the consumer

centers.[70]

As of 2025 carbon capture and storage is emerging as a way to decarbonise Cement production.

French company Air Liquide was granted EU funding for two CCS projects in Kujawy (Poland)and

the K6 Program aimed at producing the first carbon neutral Cement in Europe in Lumbres, France.

The projects are expected to start operation between by 2028 and capture 18.1 MtCO2 emissions

over a decade.[71]

CO

2 absorption

Hydrated products of Portland Cement, such as concrete and mortars, slowly reabsorb atmospheric

CO2 gas, which has been released during calcination in a kiln. This natural process, reversed to

calcination, is called carbonation. As it depends on CO2 diffusion into the bulk of concrete, its rate
depends on many parameters, such as environmental conditions and surface area exposed to the

atmosphere. Carbonation is particularly significant at the latter stages of the concrete life - after

demolition and crushing of the debris. It is estimated that nearly 30% of atmospheric COgenerated by

Cement production is reabsorbed during the life-cycle of Cement [Link] process is

considered as a mechanism of concrete degradation. It reduces pH of concrete that promotes

reinforCement steel corrosion.[72] However, as the product of Ca(OH)2 carbonation, CaCO3, occupies

a greater volume, porosity of concrete reduces. This increases strength and hardness of concrete. [75]

There are proposals to reduce carbon footprint of hydraulic Cement by adopting non-hydraulic

Cement, lime mortar, for certain applications. It reabsorbs some of the CO

2 during hardening, and has a lower energy requirement in production than Portland Cement. A few

other attempts to increase absorption of carbon dioxide include Cements based on magnesium (Sorel

Cement.

Heavy metal emissions in the airIn some circumstances, mainly depending on the origin and the

composition of the raw materials used, the high-temperature calcination process of limestone and

clay minerals can release in the atmosphere gases and dust rich in volatile heavy metals,

e.g. thallium,[80] cadmium and mercury are the most toxic. Heavy metals (Tl, Cd, Hg, ...) and

also selenium are often found as trace elements in common metal sulfides (pyrite (FeS2), zinc blende

(ZnS), galena (PbS), ...) present as secondary minerals in most of the raw materials. Environmental

regulations exist in many countries to limit these emissions. As of 2011 in the United States, Cement

kilns are "legally allowed to pump more toxins into the air than are hazardous-waste incinerators."[81]

Heavy metals present in the clinker

The presence of heavy metals in the clinker arises both from the natural raw materials and from the

use of recycled by-products or alternative fuels. The high pH prevailing in the Cement porewater

(12.5 < pH < 13.5) limits the mobility of many heavy metals by decreasing their solubility and

increasing their sorption onto the Cement mineral phases.

Nickel, zinc and lead are commonly found in Cement in non-negligible

concentrations. Chromium may also directly arise as natural impurity from the raw materials or as
secondary contamination from the abrasion of hard chromium steel alloys used in the ball mills when

the clinker is ground.

A Cement plant consumes 3 to 6 GJ of fuel per tonne of clinker produced, depending on the raw

materials and the process used. Most Cement kilns today use coal and petroleum coke as primary

fuels, and to a lesser extent natural gas and fuel oil. Selected waste and by-products with

recoverable calorific value can be used as fuels in a Cement kiln (referred to as co-processing),

replacing a portion of conventional fossil fuels, like coal, if they meet strict specifications. Selected

waste and by-products containing useful minerals such as calcium, silica, alumina, and iron can be

used as raw materials in the kiln, replacing raw materials such as clay, shale, and limestone. Because

some materials have both useful mineral content and recoverable calorific value, the distinction

between alternative fuels and raw materials is not always clear. For example, sewage sludge has a

low but significant calorific value, and burns to give ash containing minerals useful in the clinker

matrix.[82] Scrap automobile and truck tires are useful in Cement manufacturing as they have high

calorific value and the iron embedded in tires is useful as a feed stock. Clinker is manufactured by

heating raw materials inside the main burner of a kiln to a temperature of 1,450 °C. The flame

reaches temperatures of 1,800 °C. The material remains at 1,200 °C for 12–15 seconds at 1,800 °C or

sometimes for 5–8 seconds (also referred to as residence time). These characteristics of a clinker kiln

offer numerous benefits and they ensure a complete destruction of organic compounds, a total

neutralization of acid gases, sulphur oxides and hydrogen chloride.

Furthermore, heavy metal traces are embedded in the clinker structure and no by-products, such as

ash or residues, are produced. The EU Cement industry already uses more than 40% fuels derived

from waste and biomass in supplying the thermal energy to the grey clinker making process.

Although the choice for this so-called alternative fuels (AF) is typically cost driven, other factors are

becoming more important. Use of alternative fuels provides benefits for both society and the

company:

CO

2-emissions are lower than with fossil fuels, waste can be co-processed in an efficient and sustainable
manner and the demand for certain virgin materials can be reduced. Yet there are large

differences in the share of alternative fuels used between the European Union (EU) member

states. The societal benefits could be improved if more member states increase their alternative fuels

share. The Ecofys study[85] assessed the barriers and opportunities for further uptake of alternative

fuels in 14 EU member states. The Ecofys study found that local factors constrain the market

potential to a much larger extent than the technical and economic feasibility of the Cement industry

itself.

Reduced-footprint Cement

Growing environmental concerns and the increasing cost of fossil fuels have resulted, in many

countries, in a sharp reduction of the resources needed to produce Cement, as well as effluents (dust

and exhaust gases).[86] Reduced-footprint Cement is a Cementitious material that meets or exceeds

the functional performance capabilities of Portland Cement. Various techniques are under

development.

One is geopolymer Cement, which incorporates recycled materials, thereby reducing consumption of

raw materials, water, and energy. Another approach is to reduce or eliminate the production and

release of damaging pollutants and greenhouse gasses, particularly CO

Recycling old Cement in electric arc furnaces is another approach.[88] A team at the University of

Edinburgh has developed the 'DUPE' process based on the microbial activity of Sporosarcina

pasteurii, a bacterium precipitating calcium carbonate, which, when mixed with sand and urine, can

produce mortar blocks with a compressive strength 70% of that of concrete. [89]
 COMPANY PROFILE

- ULTRATECH CEMENT LIMITED, TADIPATRI

Project Implemented by : UltraTech Cement Limited,

Tadipatri Project Implemented in : 2007

Company Details
UltraTech Cement Limited, a subsidiary of Grasim Industries Limited, a group company of Aditya Birla

Group is a leading manufacturer of Cement in India with installed capacity of about 17 Million Tonnes

Per Annum (MTPA).

UltraTech’s Cement plants are located in Maharashtra (Awarpur), Chhattisgarh (Hirmi), Gujarat (Kova- ya)

and Andhra Pradesh (Tadipatri), NCCL (Jafarabad) with grinding units at Orissa (Jharsuguda),

TamilNadu (Arakkonam), West Bengal (Durgapur), Gujarat (Magdalla) and Maharashtra (Ratnagiri).

Grasim – UltraTech Cement combined is one of the largest Cement producer in India having 21% of

installed Indian Cement manufacturing capacity & is the 8th largest Cement producer in the world.

Project Details
APCW has established a comprehensive system for usage of waste as Alternate Fuel in its process. It uses

pharmaceutical waste (both solid and liquid) as alternate fuel. It also uses various other wastes such as

paint sludge, spent carbon, Dicomol powder, cotton waste, ETP sludge, organic solvent.

APCW has installed 45 KL capacity tank at Line-1 and temporary truck tanker of capacity 20 KL in

Line-2 for storage of Liquid Organic Solvent, which is a Pharma waste used as alternate fuel. Pres- ently,

the unit is using the Liquid Organic Solvent as a fossil fuel up to 3%. The target is to use this pharma

waste up to 5%, which effectively replaces the conventional fossil fuel.

Issues faced during implementation
Handling of hazardous material is always an issue. With the help of supplier, the technical know-how was

developed, necessary safety precautions have been taken for safer operation.

The plant has invested about Rs 1.0 Crores for implementation of the project. This investment is for conveying
and handling equipment.

Results of the Project

APCW is replacing fossil fuel with alternative fuels in the range of 5-10 %. 1% replaCement of fossil fuel

(on thermal basis) with bio mass or alternate fuel can save 1.85 kg CO2 /MT of clinker.

• Usage of alternate fuel substitutes coal consumption

• Found to be environmental friendly since it supports sustainable development

• Reduced CO2 emissions of carbon foot print

• The variable cost of manufacturing is reduced

Replication Potential

Replication potential is very high. Cement plants can install alternative fuel handling system, depend- ing on

availability of alternative fuel.

Recommendation to other units

All Cement plants are recommended to install alternative fuel handling system.
 Your (Half Yearly Compliance Report) has been Submitted with following details

Proposal No IA/AP/IND/125643/2008

Compliance ID 112447099

Compliance Number(For Tracking) EC/M/COMPLIANCE/112447099/2025

Reporting Year 2025

Reporting Period 01 Jun(01 Oct - 31 Mar)

Submission Date 28-05-2025

RO/SRO Name V Geroge Jenner

RO/SRO Email tr025@[Link]

State ANDHRA PRADESH

RO/SRO Office Address Integrated Regional Offices, Vijayawada

Note:- SMS and E-Mail has been sent to V Geroge Jenner, ANDHRA PRADESH with Notification
to Project Proponent.
1. Introduction
UltraTech Cement Limited (UTCL) is a flagship company of Aditya Birla Group.
It is the largest manufacturer of grey Cement, ready-mix concrete (RMC) and
white Cement in India. The company has consolidated capacity of 190.46 Million
Tonnes Per Annum (Million TPA) of gray Cement. UTCL has 34 Integrated
Manufacturing Plants, 1 Clinerization Plant, 34 Grinding Units and 9 Bulk
Terminals.

It has one White Cement unit and three Wall Care putty unit, with a current capacity of
2.6 MTPA. With 348 Ready Mix Concrete (RMC) plants in 140 cities, UTCL is
the largest manufacturer of concrete in India. Its operations span across India,
UAE, Bahrain, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.

2. Andhra Pradesh Cement Works

Andhra Pradesh Cement Works, a subsidiary of UltraTech Cement Limited was
acquired by Aditya Birla Group from L&T Group in 2004. It is located on the
hilly area near Tadipatri, on the border line between Anantapur and Nandyal
Districts in Rayalseema.

It is operating an existing Integrated Cement Plant with installed capacity of 6.5

MTPA Clinker, 9.0 MTPA Cement, 100 MW CPP and 20 MW WHRS at Village:
Bhogasamudhram, Mandal: Tadipatri, District: Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh.
Environmental Clearance for the existing Integrated Cement Plant has been
obtained from MoEF&CC, New Delhi and CPP from SEIAA, Andhra Pradesh.
Details of the existing clearance is given in below table.

Table 1: Existing Units and production capacity along with Clearances

S Particulars Installed capacity Obtained EC

No
1. Clinker, 6.5 (Line I: 2.7 & Line Vide letter no. J-11011/303/2008-IA-II
MTPA II: (I) dated 8th Oct., 2008.
3.8)
2. Cement, 9.0 (Line I: 3.2 & Line
MTPA II:
5.8)
3. Captive 100 Vide SEIAA letter no.
Power Plant, SEIAA/AP/ANT-26/2010-1113
MW dated 16th July, 2011.
4. WHRS, MW 4 Vide MoEF&CC letter no. J-
11011/324/2006-IA II (I) dated
05th
March, 2007
16 Vide MoEF&CC letter no. J-
11011/324/2006-IA II (I) dated
05th
March, 2007

At present, the plant has obtained EC for expansion of the Cement plant capacity
for Clinker (6.5 to 10.0 MTPA), Cement (9.0 to 14.0 MTPA) & WHRS (20 to 36
MW) in vide letter no: J-11011/2303/2008-IA-II (I), dt: 22.07.2022.
 Consent for establishment for the above expansion project has been obtained from
APPCB in vide order no: 184/APPCB/CFE/RO-ATP/HO/2010, dt: 06.09.2022.

3. Interlinked projects:
The main raw material, Limestone will be sourced from the following captive
limestone mines which are present in Kolimigundla Mandal, Nandyal District,
Andhra Pradesh.
1. Tummalapenta Limestone Mine (Mining Lease Area- 844.939 ha) with
production capacity of 9.2 MTPA at Villages: Tummalapenta and Petnikota,
Mandal: Kolimigundla, District: Nandyal, Andhra Pradesh.
Environmental Clearance for the same was obtained from MoEF&CC, New
Delhi vide letter no. J-11015/273/2006-IA. II (M); dated 21st May 2007.

2. Petnikota Limestone Mine (Mining Lease Area: 29.7 ha) with production
capacity of 1.0 MTPA at Village: Petnikota, Mandal: Kolimigundla, District:
Nandyal, Andhra Pradesh.
Environmental Clearance for the same was obtained from SEIAA, Andhra
Pradesh vide letter no. SEIAA/AP/KNL-42/2008-602; dated 8th June 2009.

3. Tummalapenta Lease-2 Limestone Mine (Mining Lease Area: 114.372 ha)

with production capacity of 3.0 MTPA at Villages: Ankireddipalle
&Tummalapenta, Mandal: Kolimigundla, District: Nandyal, Andhra Pradesh.
Environmental Clearance for the same was obtained from MoEF&CC, New
Delhi vide letter no. J-11015/174/[Link] (M); dated 9th June 2009.

4. Bandarlapalle Limestone Mine (Mining Lease Area: 90.52 ha) with production
capacity of 1.30 MTPA at Village- Bandarlapalle, Mandal- Kolimigundla,
District-Nandyal (erstwhile Kurnool) Andhra Pradesh.
Environmental Clearance for the same was obtained from MoEF&CC, New
Delhi vide letter no. J-11015/175/[Link] (M); dated 9th June 2009.

5. Guruvanipalle Limestone Mine (Mining Lease Area: 395.15 ha) with

production capacity of 0.30 MTPA at Village: Guruvanipalle Revenue
Village: Petnikota, Mandal: Kolimigundla, District: Nandyal Andhra Pradesh.
Environmental Clearance for the same was obtained from MoEF&CC, New
Delhi vide letter no. J-11015/212/[Link] (M) dated 1st July 2009.

At Present, the Guruvanipalle Limestone Mine has obtained EC for expansion

of the limestone capacity from 0.30 MTPA to to 4.00 Million TPA, Soil: 0.31
Million TPA (Total Excavation: 4.31 Million TPA) in vide letter no: IA-J-
11015/56/2021-IA-II(NCM), dt: 06.02.2024

4. Present Report on Condition wise compliance Report:

APCW has obtained the Consent to Operate order vide order no.:
APPCB/KNL/TPT/184/HO/CFO/2021; dated: 27.09.2021. One of the conditions
in CFO is as follows:
 EC COMPLAINCE STATUS REPORT

Name of the Project : UltraTech Cement Limited

Andhra Pradesh Cement Works
Bhogasamudhram (V), Tadipatri (M) Anantapur
(Dist.),
Andhra Pradesh
Environment Clearance No : EC:Letter No: J - 11011/303/2008- IA-II (I) Dated:
October 8, 2008
Expansion of Clinker Production 5.4 – 6.5 MTPA
and
Cement 7.6 – 9.0 MTPA
Period of Compliance Report : 1st October 2024 to 31st March 2025

Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status

A. Specific conditions:
(i) The company shall comply with all the Being Complied as mentioned in the
environmental protection measures and EIA/EMP report. Major Pollution Control
safeguards proposed in the documents equipment installed as enclosed in Annexure
submitted to the Ministry. All the I) like bag house, ESP/bag filters, plantation,
recommendations made in the EIA/EMP in water spraying systems, paved roads,
respect of environmental management, and installation of covered conveyor belts, Dust
risk mitigation measures relating to the project Extraction systems etc. and its maintenance.
shall be implemented. The amount spent on the environmental
protection is given below.

Environmental protection expenditure for the period of October 2024 -Mar 2025

Sr.
No. Disposal/Treatment/Remediation cost INR (Lacs)
1 Treatment and Disposal of Solid Waste 19.45
2 Environmental Monitoring Charges 5.75
3 Maintenance cost of the Air pollution control devices 97.38
4 Treatment of sewage and effluent cost 7.78
Road Sweeping/Fugitive dust control/Rain water Harvesting and
5 31.07
Greenbelt
Development
6 CEMS, CAAQMS & OEMS 9.3
Total amount 151.28
(ii) The project proponent shall utilize modern Exploring carbon capture technologies, such
technologies for capturing of carbon emitted as expanding plantations and using renewable
and shall also develop carbon sink/carbon energy sources, and will submit the
sequestration resources capable of capturing completed report to the IRO in Vijayawada.
more than emitted. The implementation report
shall be submitted to the IRO, MoEF&CC in
this
regard.
(iii) The activities and the action plan proposed by  All the commitments made during the
the project proponent to address the issues Public Hearing regarding the issues raised
raised during public hearing and socio- will be fulfilled and completed within
economic issues in the study area shall be stipulated time.
completed as per
the schedule presented before the Committee
Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status
and as described in the EIA report in letter and  An amount of Rs. 373.5 lakh has been
spirit. earmarked for the Public Hearing issues.
Details of the same is given as Annexure
II.
(iv) Particulate matter emissions from all the stacks Pollution control equipment such as RABH,
shall be less than 30 mg/Nm3. ESP, Bag filters and Bag houses & JPF at all
transfer points installed for air pollution
control to keep the emissions below 30
mg/Nm3. All the stack values are within the
norms.
(v) Three tier Green Belt shall be developed in a 129 ha. area covering 39% of the total land
time frame of one year covering 33% of the with native species developed under
total land area with native species all along the Greenbelt, density to up to 2500 plants per
periphery of the project site of adequate width hectare.
and tree density shall not be less than 2500 per
ha. Survival rate of green belt developed shall
be monitored on periodic basis to ensure that
damaged plants are replaced with new plants in
the subsequent years.

Plantation During FY 2024-25

(vi) Additional 1300 KLD water will be required Permission for the additional water
for proposed expansion project; which is requirement of 1300 KLD has been obtained
proposed to be sourced from Ground water, from Ground Water & Water Audit
existing rainwater sump at mine site and department, Vijayawada in vide letter
treated water from STP. no: 1947/GP/2022, dt: 30.05.2022. Copy of
Necessary permission shall be the same is enclosed as Annexure III.
obtained from the Competent Authority in this
regard. Ground water extraction are allowed
only for drinking purpose.
(vii) Project proponent should ensure that ground The Hydro geological study has been
water assessment is carried out once in two conducted and submitted for the EC which
years by a reputed institute and the report of was granted dt: 22.07.2022. The water levels
same shall be submitted to IRO, MoEF&CC. are being varied from 9- 21 mts and ground
water quality values in the study area is
within the permissible limits as per the
drinking water standards. The Hydro
geological study is being carried out regularly.
(viii) All stockyards shall be having impervious All the raw materials are being stored inside
flooring and shall be equipped with water spray the closed sheds. Water spraying is being
system for dust suppression. Stock yards shall carried out.
also have
garland drains to trap the run off material.
(ix) Slip roads shall be provided at the gates and There are no main road crossings and hence it
along crossings on main roads. is
not applicable.
(x) All internal and connecting road to the All the internal connecting roads are paved
Highway with
shall be black topped/ concreted with suitable concrete/black topped roads.
Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status
load in term of Million Standard Axle (MSA)
as
per IRC guidelines
(xi) Performance monitoring of pollution control Plant is commissioned 27th June 2024.
equipment shall be taken up yearly and Performance monitoring of pollution control
compliance status in this regard shall be reported Equipment will be done and report will be
to the concerned Regional Office of the submitted.
MoEF&CC.
(xii) Dioxin and furans shall be monitored twice a Dioxins and furans are being monitored twice
year during co-processing of hazardous waste in a year. The latest analysis of the Dioxins
and report shall be submitted to the Regional and furans was monitored in the month of
Office of the MoEF&CC. October-2024, the Monitored reports are
enclosed as
Annexure IV.
(xiii) Project proponent shall develop separate Industrial waste water is not being mixed
drainage system for storm water and industrial with the storm water. Waste water from the
waste water and effectively prevent the CPP is being treated in the ETP and same
pollution of natural waterbody. treated
water is used for dust suppression.
(xiv) Pet coke dosing shall be controlled automatically As informed the pet coke dosing will be
to control SO2 emission from chimney within automatically controlled to keep SO2
the emissions
prescribed limits. in prescribed limit.
(xv) Rain water harvesting shall be carried out as per At present 5 No’s of check dams are
the action plan submitted in the EIA report. constructed around the plant for augmenting
the ground water, 2 No’s of rain water
harvesting structures areconstructed, 11 nos
of rainwater harvesting pits developed to
recharge Ground Water inside the plant.
 Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status
Rain Water Harvesting Structures
(xvi) All the recommendations made in the risk All recommendations made in the EIA/EMP
assessment report shall be implemented and report regarding the safety measures for
compliance status in this regard shall be Exposure to High Temperature, Physical
furnished to the Regional Office of the Hazards, Fire, Explosion etc., will be
MoEF&CC strictly
along with the six-monthly compliance report. followed.
(xvii) Hydrological study/ ground water leaching The Hydro geological study has been
study shall be carried out to observe the conducted and submitted for the EC which
contamination of Ground water and appropriate was granted dt: 22.07.2022. The water levels
mitigation measures shall be adopted. are being varied from 9- 21 mts and ground
water quality values in the study
area is within the permissible limits as per the
drinking water standards. Further it is
informed that Hydro geological study will be
carried out
regularly.
(xviii) PP has to ensure to minimize the Pollution due to The following measures mentioned in the
vehicular movement EIA/EMP report will be followed.
 Speed of the vehicles is being/will
be limited to 20 kmph.
 Regular spraying of the water on the
roads is being done to ensure to
reduce the fugitive emissions.
 Tarpaulin Sheets is being used
for covering of trucks.
 Proper maintenance of the vehicles is

being/will be done regularl

(xix) All vehicles engaged in road transportation shall All the vehicles are being covered with
be covered to stop the pollution due to dust tarpaulin
dispersion. sheets carrying the Cement bags or raw
materials.
Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status
(xx) Sufficient numbers of additional truck mounted Sufficient number of water sprinklers at
Fog/Mist water cannons shall be procured and material handling area as well as water
operated regularly inside the project premises sprinklers for roads are already existing.
and also in the surrounding villages to arrest
suspended dust in the atmosphere. The
implementation report shall be submitted to
IRO,
MoEF&CC.
(xxi) Project proponent shall develop a control We have already installed various stacks like
strategy and plan that incorporates the pollution 3 no’s Reverse Air Bag house, 3 nos of
control measures. The Clean Air practices shall Cooler ESP, 3
be adopted like mechanical collectors, wet no’s Coal mill bag house, 4 nos of Cement
scrubbers, fabric filters (baghouses), mill bag
electrostatic precipitators, combustion systems houses, 2 nos of ESP for Power plant and 202
(thermal oxidizers), condensers, absorbers, and bag
biological degradation. filters in the Cement plant to control the
emissions.
(xxii) PP shall conduct study relating to assessment of The free silica content is being assessed
quartz free silica in the SPM/PM10 within regularly and
6 the report of the same is being attached as
months. The implementation report shall be Annexure V.
submitted to IRO, MoEF&CC.
(xxiii) PP shall monitor the coal dust at coal The coal dust has been monitored near coal
unloading, crushing, furnace areas and should yard and values are well within the
be within 2 mg/m3, respirable dust fraction permissible limit. Monitoring results of the
containing less same is attached as
than 5% quartz as per Indian Factories Act,1948. Annexure VI.
(xxiv) The estimated total annual generated of 99.99 % of the dust is being captured by the
suspended particulate matter must be Pollution Control Equipment.
documented with details of estimation. The
industry should report what is the percentage of
the SPM captured by the pollution
control
systems
(xxv) A proper action plan must be implemented to As per the granted CFO, the generated
dispose of the electronic waste generated in the electronic waste is being/will be sold
industry. to
authorized vendors.
B. General conditions
I. Statutory compliance:
i. The Environment Clearance (EC) granted to CFO has been obtained from the APPCB in
the project/ activity is strictly under the vide Consent Order
provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006 and its No:339471/
amendments issued from time to time. It does APPCB/KNL/ATP/CTO&HWA/HO/202427/
not tantamount/ construe to approvals/ consent/ 06/2024
permissions etc., required to be obtained or .All statutory approvals from concerned
standards/conditions to be followed under any departments will be taken before starting of
other Acts/Rules/Subordinate legislations., as any activity.
may be applicable to the project.
II. Air quality monitoring and preservation
i. The project proponent shall install 24x7 We have installed 4 online CAAQMS inside
Continuous Emission Monitoring System the
(CEMS) plant site. The CEMS and CAAQMS has
been
Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status
at process stacks to monitor stack emission as connected to SPCB and CPCB online servers
well as 4 Nos. Continuous Ambient Air Quality and regularly being calibrated from time to
Station (CAAQS) for monitoring AAQ time according to equipment supplier
parameters with respect to standards prescribed specification through labs recognized under
in Environment (Protection) Rules 1986 as Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 or NABL
amended from time to time. The CEMS and accredited laboratories. The latest Continuous
CAAQMS shall be connected to SPCB and Ambient Air quality results for the period
CPCB online servers and calibrate these October’24 to March- 25 is given below.
systems from time to time according to
equipment supplier specification through labs
recognized under Environment (Protection)
Act, 1986 or NABL
accredited laboratories
 Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status

ii. The project proponent shall monitor fugitive Being Monitored. Monitoring of fugitive
emissions in the plant premises at least once in emissions is being done regularly through
every quarter through labs recognized under NABL Recognized laboratory. The latest
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. fugitive emissions monitored and its results
report is
 given below.

Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status

iii. The project proponent shall provide leakage All bag filters and Jet Pulse Filters will have
detection and mechanized bag cleaning in-situ mechanism of Pulse jet cleaning
facilities for better maintenance of bags. mechanism. Leakage due to puncture in bags
or over loading of the dust due failure of
cleaning mechanism will be detected by
pressure difference across the bag filter and
necessary repairs will be taken up
immediately by isolation of particular
defective chamber without
effecting
functioning of Bag filter.
iv. The project proponent shall ensure covered All the production and raw materials that are
transportation and conveying of ore, coal and being transported through the trucks are
other raw material to prevent spillage and dust covered using tarpaulin sheets. Fly ash is
generation; Use closed bulkers for carrying being transported only using bulkers with
fly pneumatic
Ash system.
v. The project proponent shall provide wind All the raw materials are being stored inside
shelter fence and chemical spraying on the raw the closed sheds. Water sprayers will be
material stock piles; kept
around the stock yards is being sprayed
regularly to control fugitive emissions.
vi. Ventilation system shall be designed for Ventilation system has been set up for the
adequate air changes as per the prevailing norms adequate air changes as per the norms. Also,
for all tunnels, motor houses, and proper safety equipment is being provided
Cement to
bagging plants. the workers.
III. Water quality monitoring and preservation
i. The project proponent shall install 24x7 No process waste is being generated from the
continuous effluent monitoring system with Cement
respect to standards prescribed in Environment plant. Hence there is no Effluent Treatment
(Protection) Rules 1986 vide G.S.R. No. 612 Plant
(E) dated 25thAugust, 2014 (Cement) and (ETP).
subsequent amendment dated 9thMay, 2016
(Cement)
Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status
and 10th May, 2016 (in case of Co-processing
Cement) as amended from time to time;
S.O.3305
(E) dated 7th December 2015 (Thermal Power
Plants) as amended from time to time) and
connected to SPCB and CPCB online servers
and calibrate these systems from time to time
according to equipment supplier specification
through labs recognized under Environment
(Protection) Act, 1986 or NABL
accredited
laboratories.
ii. The project proponent shall regularly monitor Regular monitoring of the ground water level
ground water quality at least twice a year (pre and its quality is being tested quarterly
and post-monsoon) at sufficient numbers of through NABL Accredited laboratory.
piezometers/sampling wells in the plant and
adjacent areas through labs recognized under
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and
NABL
accredited laboratories.
iii. Sewage Treatment Plant shall be provided for STP of capacity 600 KLD has already been
treatment of domestic wastewater to meet the installed and is utilized in the plant premises.
prescribed standards.
iv. Garland drains and collection pits shall be Rain water from the stock piles that is stored
provided for each stock pile to arrest the run- outside the shed is routed to temporary ponds
off in the event of heavy rains and to check the so as to settle all the suspended matter
water
pollution due to surface run off
v. Water meters shall be provided at the inlet to all Water meters has been installed at all the in the
unit processes in the Cement plant. existing lines including Line-III.
vi. The project proponent shall make efforts to Waste water from the domestic purpose is
minimize water consumption in the Cement being treated in the STP and same is being
plant complex by segregation of used water, utilized for greenbelt and dust suppression.
practicing cascade use and by recycling treated The company will take further steps for
water. minimizing the
utilization of water.
IV. Noise monitoring and prevention
i. Noise quality shall be monitored as per the Noise quality is being monitored as per the
prescribed Noise Pollution (Regulation and prescribed norms regularly and report in this
Control) Rules, 2000 and report in this regard regard is being submitted to Regional Officer
shall be submitted to Regional Officer of the for every six months. The noise monitored
Ministry as a part of six-monthly levels are given below.
compliance
report.
 Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status

V. Energy Conservation measures

i. Waste heat recovery system shall be provided for The plant has two waste recovery systems at
kiln and cooler. present with capacities of each 31 MW and
16 MW. The consolidated total WHRS
capacity is 47 MW.

ii. The project proponent makes efforts to achieve Pyro-process has been optimized and variable
power consumption less than 65 units/ton for frequency drives motors installed to conserve
Portland Pozzolana Cement (PPC) and 85 the energy below 65 units/ton for Portland
units/ton for Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) Pozzolona
production and thermal energy consumption of Cement (PPC) and 85 units/ton for
670 Kcal/Kg of clinker. Ordinary
Portland Cement (OPC).
Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status
iv. Provide the project proponent for LED lights Plant has been provided with LED bulbs in
in the
their offices and residential areas. plant colony.
VI. Waste management
i. Used refractories shall be recycled as far as Used refractories will be recycled to
possible. the
maximum possible extent.
VII. Green Belt
i. The project proponent shall prepare GHG Decarbonization program is under process
emissions inventory for the plant and shall which included GHG inventory analysis and
submit the program for reduction of the same exploring the technologies for capturing the
including carbon sequestration by trees in the carbon emitted by increasing the plantation,
plant premises. use of renewable energy, carbon sequestration
technologies etc.

ii. Project proponent shall submit a study report Decarbonization program is under process
within six months on Decarbonization program, which included GHG inventory analysis and
which would essentially consist of company’s exploring the technologies for capturing the
carbon emissions, carbon budgeting/balancing, carbon emitted by increasing the plantation,
carbon sequestration activities and carbon use of renewable energy, carbon sequestration
offsetting strategies. Further, the report shall technologies etc.
also contain time bound action plan to reduce
its carbon intensity of its operations and supply
chains, energy transition pathway from fossil
fuels to Renewable energy etc. All these
activities/ assessments should be measurable
and monitorable with defined time frames.
VIII. Public hearing and Human health issues
i. Emergency preparedness plan based on the Duly noted, Emergency preparedness plan
Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment that is mentioned in the EIA/EMP report will
(HIRA) and Disaster Management Plan shall be implemented.
be
implemented.
ii. The project proponent shall carry out heat stress PPEs has been provided to the workers
analysis for the workmen who work in high working near high temperature zone in the
temperature work zone and provide Personal plant
Protection Equipment (PPE) as per the norms.
iii. Occupational health surveillance of the workers Regular health check-ups of the workers are
shall be done on a regular basis and records being done regularly. A total of 1704 personal
maintained. health worker health check-up is done.
No
occupancy Health related issues were
detected. Record of the same is provided
below
 Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status

IX. Environment Management

i. The project proponent shall comply with the The company is being /complied with all the
provisions contained in this Ministry’s OM environmental protection measures as
vide F. No. 22-65/[Link] dated mentioned in the report. All the PCE that has
30/09/2020. As part of Corporate Environment been proposed in the EIA/EMP being
Responsibility (CER) activity, company shall installed. CFE regarding the same has bene
adopt villages based on the socio-economic obtained from APPCB dt: 06.09.2022 Also,
survey and undertake community the company is taking community
developmental activities in consultation with development activities as a part of CSR and
the village Panchayat and skill development program.43.96 Lacs
the District Administration as committed. amount spent on the CSR activities for past
six months.
CSR Expenditure October 2024 to Mar 2025
[Link] Focus Area Spent (In Lacs)
1 Education 26.54
2 Health Care 26.51
3 Sustainable Livelihood 26.71
4 Infrastructure Development 123.89
5 Social Causes/Others 22.53
Total 226.2
ii. The company shall have a well laid down We have well laid Corporate Environmental
environmental policy duly approve by the Policy adopted by Board of Directors
Board of Directors. The environmental policy indicating clear framework to become
should prescribe for standard operating Environmentally Sustainable organization. A
procedures to have proper checks and balances hierarchical system or administrative
and to bring into focus any order of the company has been framed to deal
infringements/deviation/violation of the with the environmental issues and for
 environmental/ forest / wildlife norms/ ensuring compliance with the conditions
conditions. The company shall have stipulated in
defined

Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status

system of reporting infringements/ deviation/ various clearances and consents. The policy
violation of the environmental/ forest/ wildlife is given below.
norms/ conditions and/ or shareholders/ stake
holders.
The copy of the board resolution in this regard
shall be submitted to the MoEF&CC as a part
of
six-monthly report.
iii. A separate Environmental Cell both at the The company has the separate Environmental
project and company head quarter level, with cell. A hierarchical system or administrative
qualified personnel shall be set up under the order of the company has been framed to deal
control of senior Executive, who will directly to with the environmental issues and for
the head of the organization. ensuring compliance with the conditions
stipulated in various clearances and consents.
Structure of the Environmental management
cell is given
below:
Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status
 Environment Management Cell

Unit Head

FH - Technical FH - Mines

DH - Mechanical DH - DH -
Process SH -
Instrumentation
Environment

Assistant
Manager -
Environmen
t
X. Miscellaneous
i. The project proponent shall make public the The company has given the advertisement
environmental clearance granted for their regarding the Environmental Clearance in
project along with the environmental local newspapers.
conditions and safeguards at their cost by
prominently advertising it at least in be in the
vernacular language within seven days and in
addition this shall also be displayed in the
project proponent’s website permanently.

ii. The copies of the environmental clearance shall The copies of the Environmental Clearance
be submitted by the project proponents to the have been submitted to local panchayat.
Heads of local bodies, Panchayats and Acknowledgement copy of the same is given
Municipal Bodies in addition to the relevant below.
offices of the Government who in turn has to
display the same for 30 days from the date of
receipt.
Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status
 Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status

iii. The project proponent shall upload the status Status of the compliance of the stipulated
of compliance of the stipulated environment conditions is being uploaded in the company
clearance conditions, including results of website regularly.
monitored data on their website and update the
same on half-yearly basis.
iv. The project proponent shall monitor the The major pollutants are being monitored
criteria pollutants level namely; PM10, SO2, regularly and the monitoring results of the
NOx (ambient levels as well as stack same is being displayed near the main gate.
emissions) or critical sectoral parameters, Photocopy of the same is given below.
indicated for the projects and display the same
at a convenient location for disclosure to the
public and put on the website of the company.
 Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status

v. The project proponent shall submit six-monthly The proponent has adhered the stipulated
reports on the status of the compliance of the environmental conditions and the reports
stipulated environmental conditions on the have been uploaded in the MOEF&CC portal.
website of the ministry of Environment, Forest
and Climate Change at environment
clearance
portal.
vi. The project proponent shall submit the submitting the Environmental Statement for
environmental statement for each financial year each financial year. Latest Environmental
in Form-V to the concerned State Pollution Statement has been submitted to
Control Board as prescribed under the Environmental Engineer APPCB on
Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986, as 26.09.2024 for the year 2023-24. Copy of the
amended subsequently and put on the website same is given below.
of the company.
 Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status

vii. The project proponent shall inform the Duly Noted, will be complied.
Regional Office as well as the Ministry, the date
of financial closure and final approval of the
project by the concerned authorities,
commencing the land development wo r k and
start of production
operation by the project.
viii. The project proponent shall abide by all the All the commitments and recommendations
commitments and recommendations made in made in the EIA/EMP reports and public
the EIA/EMP report, commitment made during hearing reports will be followed.
Public H e a r i n g and also that during
their
presentation to the Expert Appraisal Committee.
ix. The PP shall put all the environment related All the environment related expenditure and
expenditure, expenditure related to Action Plan amount spent on the CSR activities and on
on the PH issues, and other commitments made PH issues are being uploaded along
in the EIA/EMP Report etc. in the company with EC
web Compliance report on company’s website.
Sl. No. Condition Description Compliance status
site for the information to public/public
domain. The PP shall also put the information
on the left-over funds allocated to EMP and PH
as committed in the earlier ECs and shall be
carried out and spent in next three years, in the
company web site for the information to
public/public
domain.
x. No further expansion or modifications in the Noted, any further expansion, prior approval
plant shall be carried out without prior approval will be taken from MoEF&CC.
of the Ministry of Environment, Forests
and
Climate Change (MoEF&CC).
xi. Concealing factual data or submission of Noted and strictly adhered to condition.
false/fabricated data may result in revocation of
this environmental clearance and attract action
under the provisions of
Environment
(Protection) Act, 1986.
xii. The Ministry may revoke or suspend the Condition is duly noted.
clearance, if implementation of any of the above
conditions is not satisfactory.
xiii. The Ministry reserves the right to stipulate Condition is duly noted for implementation.
additional conditions if found necessary. The
Company in a time bound manner
shall
implement these conditions.
xiv. The Regional Office of this Ministry shall Condition is duly noted. We will cooperate
monitor compliance of the stipulated with the officer (s) of the Regional Office by
conditions. The project authorities should furnishing the requisite data /
extend full cooperation to the officer (s) of the information/monitoring reports.
Regional Office by furnishing the
requisite data /
information/monitoring reports.
xv. Any appeal against this EC shall lie with the Condition is duly noted.
National Green Tribunal, if preferred, within a
period of 30 days as prescribed under Section
16
of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.
Name of the Project : UltraTech Cement Limited
Andhra Pradesh Cement
Works
Bhogasamudhram (V), Tadipatri (M) Anantapur
(Dist.),
Andhra Pradesh
Environment Clearance No : EC Letter No: F. No. J-11011/303/2008-IA-II(I) dated
22nd July 2022, Expansion of Integrated Cement Plant
- Clinker (6.5 to 10 MTPA), Cement (9.0 to 14.0
MTPA) and WHRS (20 to 36 MW)
Period of Compliance Report : 1st October 2024 to 31st March 2025

S. No Description Description of Compliance

SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
1 The company shall provide ESP's to clinker a. ESP’s are provided for Clinker cooler and
cooler and captive power plant, Bag houses CPP Boilers.
to kiln/raw mill and Cement mill and bag b. RABH is provided for Kiln & Raw mill, Bag
filters to lime stone crusher and all otherhouse for Cement & Coal mills and Bag filters
sections to control particulate emission for LS crusher and other sections.
below 100 mg/Nm3 c. Enclosed Analysis Reports for RABH, Bag
houses & ESP's in in the below. Emission values
are complying with MoEF&CC new emission
notification Dt 10.05.2016 and analysis report
are
given the below
Stack Emission Report (October 2024 to March 2025)
 S. No Description Description of Compliance

All the Values are expressed in mg/m3

SO2, NOx Values are corrected to 10% of Oxygen in Cement Plant& 6 % of Oxygen in TPP
2 Bag filters shall be provided to control the a. 199 + Nos of JPF’s are provided in the
fugitive emissions generated during material Cement plant including transfer points, raw
transfer, Packing, loading and unloading. material hoppers and material handling
The project authorities shall store all the raw locations.
materials except limestone in the covered b. Raw materials (Like Lime Stone, Gypsum,
sheds to control fugitive emissions. Bauxite etc.) are being stored in a closed covered
sheds and clinker is stored in clinker silos
c. Pictorial evidences are given the below
 COVERED RAW MATERIAL SHEDS & TRANSPORTATION

JPFs at Transfer Points Closed Clinker Storage & Conveyors

S. No Description Description of Compliance

Closed Clinker Storage & Conveyors Closed LS Shed – Phase I

Closed Gypsum Storage Yard Closed Bauxite Sheds

3 The locations of ambient air quality a. Four Air Quality locations have been set-up
monitoring stations shall be set up as per consulting with APPCB and considering local
statutory requirement in consultation with meteorology and receptors of pollution into
the A. P. Pollution Control Board (APPCB) consideration and also by executing air quality
and additional stations shall be installed, if modeling.
required in the downwind direction as well b. Monitoring Data for the report period October
as where maximum ground level 2024 to March 2025 is given below
concentrations are
anticipated.
 S. No Description Description of Compliance

Note: PM10, PM2.5, SO2 & NOx parameters are expressed in µg/m3

4 Total water requirement shall be met a. The water requirement for plant operations is
through groundwater. The project met from Mines Sump.
authorities shall install sewage treatment b. Sewage Treatment Plant of 600 KLD
plant to treat domestic sewage and treated capacities is installed for treating domestic
sewage shall be utilized for the green water. The treated waste water is being used for
development. No waste water shall be green belt development. Hence ‘Zero Discharge’
discharged outside the premises and ‘Zero’ is ensured.
Discharge shall be ensured c. STP treated water Analysis reports are in
given below for the period of October’24 to
Mar-2025.

5 The project authorities shall make all-out Provisions are made in Kiln and feeding systems
effort to use high calorific value hazardous are developed to feed the high calorific value
waste in the kiln and accordingly, necessary Hazardous waste. 131030.87 MT Quantity of
provision in the kiln shall be made. Hazardous waste and Non- hazardous
waste
consumed in the FY 2024-2025.
 6 The fly ash generated from the captive a. Fly ash generated from CTPP is stored in silos
power plant shall be handled in dry silos and and transported through bouzers to Cement plant
100 % utilized for manufacturing of Cement and unloaded pneumatically into Silos at Cement
plant.
b.100 % of Fly ash generated from CTPP is used
in manufacturing of PPC.
c. Total Qty of fly ash generated from CPP for
the report period is 32179 MT and the same is
utilized in Cement plant for PPC
manufacturing. The
S. No Description Description of Compliance
additional fly ash required is being procured from
outside power plants
d. Pictorial evidences are given below.
FLY ASH UNLOADING PNEUMATICALLY

7 The project authority shall transport the raw a. Raw materials are transported in closed
material and the product in covered means. conveyors and JPF’s are provided for all the
transfer points & Raw material hoppers.
b. Pictorial evidences are given below
RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTED THROUH CLOSED CONVEYORS

8 The plantation shall be carried out in 97.1 ha a. Total green belt developed in overall plant is
as per the guidelines of Central Pollution 139 hectares as on March 2025.
Control Board to mitigate the effect b. Greenbelt photos are given in below.
of fugitive
emission.
S. No Description Description of Compliance

9 The project authorities shall provide a health a. A full-fledged medical health center exists
center with all emergency medicines and with Three well-qualified Doctors and
ambulance along with full time doctor. paramedical staff, and 3 Nos Ambulances.
Occupational health surveillance of the b. Occupational health survey is carried out by
workers shall be carried out on a regular APCW - Medical Center annually.
basis and records shall be maintained as per c)Occupational health survey conducted during
the Factories Act. the report period and records maintained.
 SUMMARY OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH REPORT
October 2024 – March 2025

10 All the recommendations mentioned in the CREP Guidelines are implemented in Cement
CREP guidelines for the Cement and power Plant & Power Plant and being followed
plant shall be followed
OTHER CONDITIONS
S. No Description Description of Compliance
1 The project authorities shall strictly adhere to The stipulations given by APPCB /State Govt.
the stipulations of the SPCB/state is being followed strictly.
Government
or any other statutory body.
2 No further expansion or modifications in the No further expansion or modifications will be
plant shall be carried out without prior made in the plant without prior approval of the
approval of the Ministry of Environment Ministry of Environment and Forest
and Forest. In case of deviations or
alterations in the project proposal from
those submitted to this Ministry for
clearance, a fresh reference shall be made to
the Ministry to assess the adequacy of
conditions imposed and to add additional
environmental measures required, if
any.
3 The gaseous emissions (SO2, NOx) and We are complying with revised emission
particulate matter levels from various standard prescribed by the MoEF & CC, GOI
process units shall conform to the standards
through notification dt. 10.05.2016 for Cement
prescribed by the concerned authorities plant.
from time to time. At no time, the emissions
We have changed ESP controller for
shall exceed the prescribed limits. In theincreased tapping and changed transformer
event of failure of any pollution control from single phase to 3 phase
system adopted by the unit, the unit shall be controllers of ESP to
immediately put out of operation and shallaccommodate the new frequency controller.
not be restarted until the desired efficiency
To comply with the NOx emission standard, we
has been achieved. have installed new burner to reduce NOx
emission at Both the Lines. Currently emission
levels in all stacks are within the revised
emission standard Interlocking is provided for
pollution control equipment to trip off the
complete system in case of raise in temperature
and/or dP levels / failure of pollution control
equipment.
Monitoring data for the report period of is
given below.
Stack Emission Report (October -2024 to March -2025)
 S. No Description Description of Compliance

All the Values are expressed in mg/m3

SO2, NOx Values are corrected to 10% of Oxygen in Cement Plant& 6 % of Oxygen in TPP
4 The company shall undertake following The said waste minimization measures are
Waste Minimization measures: being followed:
(i) Reuse of by-products from the process as i.100% of Fly ash generated in CPP is used
raw materials or raw material substitutes in for manufacturing PPC.
other processes. ii. . Fly ash is transported in bouzers and
(ii) Use of “Closed pneumatic” system unloaded into silos pneumatically.
for transport of fine material. iii. All venting systems are connected to JPF’s.
(iii) All venting systems shall be connected iv. The dust collected in the JPF’s, Baghouse &
with dust arresting equipment. ESP are used in the process.
(iv) Dust collect in pollution control
equipment’s shall be used.
5 Fugitive emissions in the work zone a. Regular monitoring is being carried out for
environment, product, and raw materials Fugitive emissions at work zone area, raw
storage area shall be regularly monitored. material storage area through the NABL
The emissions shall conform to the limits accredited third party laboratory and the reports
imposed by State Pollution Control are regularly submitted to MoEF&CC-RO,
Board/Central CPCB-RO, APPCB-RO
 Pollution Control Board. office along with the compliance report.

S. No Description Description of Compliance

b. Fugitive Emission Monitoring Data for the
report period is given below.

All the values are expressed in µg/m3

PICTURES OF SOME FUGITIVE EMISSIONS CONTROL MEASURES

Water Spray Water Sprinkling Road Sweeping

Closed Hoppers Sheds with rubber curtains Mist Spray

 6 The overall noise levels in and around the a. Turbine generators, compressors are provided
plant area shall be kept within the with enclosures. Ball mills and crushers are
standards by housed
providing noise control measures inside the buildings to control the Noise
including levels.
S. No Description Description of Compliance
acoustic hoods, silencers, enclosures etc. on Equipment’s are properly lubricated for
all sources of noise generation. controlling of Noise emissions.
b. Noise Monitoring data for the report period
is given below.

SOURCE NOISE LEVELS AT CEMENT PLANT

AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS AT CEMENT PLANT

Note: All the values are expressed in dB (A)

7 The project authorities shall strictly comply a. The rules and guidelines under Manufacture,
with the rules and guidelines under Storage and import of Hazardous Chemicals
Manufacture, Storage and import of Rules, 1989 are complied.
Hazardous Chemicals Rules, 1989 as b. Authorization from SPCB is obtained for
amended and Hazardous Waste collection, reception, storage, and disposal of
(Management and handling) Rules, 1989, as hazardous wastes vide Consent Order No.
amended from time to time. Authorization APPCB/KNL/ATP/184/HO/CFO/2014-732 dated
from the SPCB shall be obtained for 16.12.2014 renewed order dt 16.08.2016 and
collection, treatment, storage, and disposal after renewed order dt 27.09.2021 it is
of hazardous wastes. valid till
30.09.2026.
S. No Description Description of Compliance
8 Rainwater harvesting shall be done within a. Mines sump with a capacity of 23 lakh m3 is
the premises. Ground water recharge developed for augmenting the ground water. The
structures shall be installed around the plant same is utilized for plant and Mines operations.
area in consultation with local authorities to b. 5 No’s of check dams are constructed around
contain the ground water table. the plant for augmenting the ground water.
c. 2 No’s of rain water harvesting structures are
constructed.
d. 11 No’s of rainwater harvesting pits developed
to recharge Ground Water inside the plant.
e. Enclosed Photographs are given below

RAIN WATER HARVESTING STRUCTURES

9 The company shall undertake eco- a. Community welfare measures are carried
developmental measures including out regularly as a part of CSR activities.
community welfare measures in the project b. The unit has spent Rs. 226.2 lakhs towards
area for the overall improvement of the the welfare measures during the report period.
environment. The eco-development plan c. The details of activities carried out details
should be submitted to the SPCB within are given below.
three months of receipt of this letter for
approval. CSR INITIATIVES (October’24 –March’25)
S. No Description Description of Compliance
2 Health Care 26.51
Sustainable
3 26.71
Livelihood
Infrastructure
4 Development 123.89
Social
5 Causes/Others 22.53

Total 226.20

10 Adequate funds must be earmarked for a. Adequate funds are earmarked for
environmental Protection and to implement Environment Protection
the conditions stipulated by the Ministry of b. The expenditure incurred for environmental
Environment and Forests as well as the protection activities for the report Period is Rs.
S.N
State Government along with the lakhs. Focus Area Spent ( in Lacs)
o
implementation schedule for all the c. The details are as given below
conditions stipulated herein. The funds 1 Education 26.54
 provided shall not be
diverted for any other purpose.

S. No Description Description of Compliance

Environmental protection expenditure for the period of October 2024 – March-

2025
Sr.
No. Disposal/Treatment/Remediation cost INR (Lacs)
1 Treatment and Disposal of Solid Waste 19.45
2 Environmental Monitoring Charges 5.75
3 Maintenance cost of the Air pollution control devices 97.38
4 Treatment of sewage and effluent cost 7.78
Road Sweeping/Fugitive dust control/Rain water Harvesting and
5 31.07
Greenbelt
Development

6 CEMS, CAAQMS & OEMS 9.3

Total amount 151.28

11 A separate environment management cell Separate Environment Management Cell exists

equipped with full fledge laboratory and the structure of the Environmental
facilities shall be set up to carry out various Management Cell Chart are given below.
management and monitoring functions. Dedicated Laboratory is available at ETP and
STP. MoEF&CC approved Third party is
arranged for monitoring and analysis activity.
 Environment Management Cell

Unit Head

FH - Technical FH - Mines

DH - MechanicalDH - Process DH -
SH -
Environment Instrumentation

Assistant
Manager
-
Environ
ment
12 The implementation of the project vis-à-vis Monitoring reports are monthly submitted to RO
environmental action plans shall be APPCB and Half yearly submitting to MoEF –
monitored by the concerned Regional Office RO and CPCB RO along with EC Compliance
of the Ministry/SPCB/CPCB. A six-monthly report.
compliance status report shall be submitted Six monthly Compliance Reports are regularly
to monitoring agencies and shall be posted sent to MoEF RO, Vijayawada and CPCB RO &
on the website of APPCB. The Compliance reports are being
the company. uploaded on
Company website.
S. No Description Description of Compliance
13 The project proponent shall inform the a. We have advertised the Environmental
public that the project has been awarded Clearance information in the local language i.e.
environmental clearance by the Ministry in Telugu dated 24.10.2008 and in English dated
and copies of the clearance letter are 24.10.2008.
available with the SPCB and may also be b. A copy of advertisement of Environmental
seen at Website of the Ministry at Clearance in the newspaper advertisement are
[Link] This shall be advertised given below.
within 7 days from the date of issue of the
clearance letter, at least in two local
newspapers that are widely circulated in the
region of which shall be in the vernacular
language of the locality concerned and a
copy of the same shall be forwarded to the
concerned Regional Office of the Ministry.
 ADVERTISEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE IN THE NEWSPAPER

14 The project authorities shall inform the Financial closure and final approval of the project
Regional Office as well as the Ministry, the has been informed RO- MoEF&CC.
date of financial closure and final approval
of the project by the concerned authorities The date of start of the Project is 04.09.1995
and
the date of start of the project
 Annexure-1
Pollution Control Equipment Installation Details

[Link]. Details of Stack Pollution Control Equipment

1 Line-1 Kiln/ Raw Mill Reverse Air Bag House
2 Line-1 Coal Mill Bag House
3 Line-1 Cooler ESP
4 Line-1 Cement Mill-1 Bag House
5 Line-1 Cement Mill-2 Bag House
6 Line-2 Kiln/ Raw Mill Reverse Air Bag House
7 Line-2 Coal Mill Bag House
8 Line-2 Cooler ESP
9 Line-2 Cement Mill 3&4 Mill Bag House
10 Line-2 Cement Mill-5 Bag House
11 Line-3 Kiln/ Raw Mill Reverse Air Bag House
12 Line-3 Coal Mill Bag House
13 Line-3 Cooler ESP
Annexure-2
Annexure-3
Annexure-4
Annexure-5
Annexure-6
 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Introduction

This chapter deals with the theoretical and conceptual framework of the study.

Customer satisfaction, Factors Affecting Customer Satisfaction, customer Demand,

Price Fairness, Cement Demand in Africa, Competitive Intensity of Cement Demand

in Africa, Background of Calisium Carbonatemunication in Ethiopia, Calisium

Carbonatemunication in Ethiopia, Cement Demand in Ethiopia, Cement Pricing in

Ethiopia and some models related to Demands quality are briefly reviewed.

2.1 Customer Satisfaction

There are ample definitions regarding consumer satisfaction by different authors and

researchers, so that there is no single and precise definition of customer satisfaction.

Due to this we are going to see different authors’ definition at different time in detail.

Experts have defined customer satisfaction in different ways. Customer satisfaction

(CS) is a term that has received considerable attention and interest among scholars

and practitioners perhaps because of its importance as a key element of business

strategy, and goal for all business activities especially in today’s competitive market (

Cementon, 2010).

Customer satisfaction is defined as an “evaluation of perceived discrepancy between

prior expectation and the actual performance of the product”. Satisfaction of

customers with products and Demands of a company is considered as most important

factor leading toward competitiveness and success. Customer satisfaction is actually

how customer evaluates the ongoing performance. According to Kim et al, (2004)

customer satisfaction is customer’s reaction to the state of satisfaction and customer’s

judgment of satisfaction level. Customer satisfaction is very important in today’s

business world as according to Deng et al., (2009) the ability of a Demand provider to

create high degree of satisfaction is crucial for product differentiation and developing

strong relationship with customers (International research journal of finance and

economics, 2010).

Customer satisfaction is a personal feeling of either pleasure or disappointment

resulting from the evaluation of Demands provided by an organization to an

individual in relation to expectations.

Demand providers frequently place a higher priority on customer satisfaction, because

it has been seen as a prerequisite to customer retention. As a positive outcome of

marketing activities, high customer satisfaction leads to repeat visitation to stores,

repeat product purchases, and word-of- mouth promotion to friends, while low

customer satisfaction has been associated with complaining behavior. A satisfied

customer often stays loyal longer, and is likely to patronize/shop at the firm in future.

Customer satisfaction can be conceptualized as either transaction-specific satisfaction

or cumulative satisfaction. Transaction-specific satisfaction is a customer’s evaluation

of her or his experience and reactions to a specific company encounter. Cumulative

satisfaction refers to customers overall evaluation of patronage experience from

inception to date (Siew etal, 2011).

The concept of customer satisfaction occupies a central position in marketing thought

and practice. Many companies today are aiming and working day and night on

customer satisfaction, because the existence of any company depend on satisfaction

the satisfaction level of customers using their product or Demand. Satisfaction is the

major outcome of marking activity and serves to link process culminating in purchase

and consumption with post purchase phenomena such as repeat purchase and brand

loyalty (Rajasekhara, 2010).

According, to Oliver, (1981) cited by Rajasekhara 2010 satisfaction is defined as a

judgment that a product or Demand feature, or the product or Demand itself, provide

(or is providing) a pleasurable level of consumption related fulfillment, including

level of under-or-over fulfillment.

According to the definition given by Oliver, 1981 as cited by Cementon, 2010 every

organization should have to look after his customers and wise to measure their

satisfaction level, because customer satisfaction is key in retaining you customer with

you. Understanding what customer expect from Demand organizations, provide a

standard of comparison against which customers judge on organization‘s

performance. Customers of Demand have expectations about what they will receive

of Demand s have expectations about what will receive from delivery system.

Undoubtedly, customer satisfaction is a key to survival and thriving in competitive

time is to win the customer and to keep them in our Demand or product range.

According to, (Joan, 2002) While the literature contains significant differences in the

definition of satisfaction; all the definitions share some common elements. When

examined as a whole, three general components can be identified:

 1) Consumer satisfaction is a response (emotional or cognitive);

2) The response pertains to a particular focus (expectations, product, consumption

experience, etc.); and

3) The response occurs at a particular time (after consumption, after choice,

based on accumulated experience, etc). Consumer responses followed a general

pattern Cementilar to the literature. Satisfaction was comprised of three basic

components, a response pertaining to a particular focus determined at a particular

time.

Customer satisfaction is defined as the result of a cognitive and affective evaluation,

where some comparison standard is compared to the actually perceived performance.

If the perceived performance is less than expected, customers will be dissatisfied. On

the other hand, if the perceived performance exceeds expectations, customers will be

satisfied. Otherwise, if the perceived expectations are met with performance,

customers are in an indifferent or neural stage. In general, increased customer

satisfaction leads to higher customer retention rate, increases customer repurchase

behavior, and ultimately drive higher firm profitability (Olu, 2010).

According to Olu generally there are two general conceptualizations of satisfaction,

namely, transaction specific satisfaction and cumulative satisfaction (Jones and Suh,

2000; La, 2004). Transaction-specific satisfaction is a customer’s evaluation of his or

her experience and reactions to a particular Demand encounter (Gray, 2004) and

cumulative satisfaction refers to the customer’s overall evaluation of the consumption

experience to date (Cook,2008) as cited by Olu, 2010.

 2.2 Factors Affecting Customer Satisfaction

Obsession with customer satisfaction is what driving change is today particularly in

Demand sector. Customer satisfaction will occur only through conscious efforts to

alter the way we approach our Demand delivery process. Demand companies must

not only change their attitude towards market but also change their way in providing

Demands with marketing expected parameters like quality, reliability, price

availability, accessibility etc. (Rajasekhara, 2010)

Though Demand provider change their way of providing Demands through changing

their attitudes and with marketing expected parameters listed above, avoiding

customer satisfaction is impossible. Because there are money factors that affects

customer satisfaction which are beyond their control. Among the factors;

2.2.1 Customer Demands

Customer Demand is a system of activities that comprises customer support system,

compliant processing, speed of compliant processing, ease of reporting compliant and

friendliness when reporting compliant (Kim, etal, 2004).customer Demands are the

opportunities for Calisium Carbonate Demand providers that are added to Cement

Demand other than voice Demands in which contents are either self-produced by

Demand provider or provided through strategic compliance with Demand provider.

The improved customer Demands are the focal point of the Calisium Carbonate

Demand providers for social as well as for economic reasons. From the social point of

view, Demand should be available to the customers on reasonable terms. As far as

economic factor is concerned, Demands should satisfy the needs of the customers.
For developing satisfaction among customers, the Calisium Carbonate Demand

provider needs to be extra careful for the customer Demands they provide.

Satisfaction of customers is determined by his evaluation of Demand provided by a

brand. The study of shows when the customers, do not get their complaints

considered properly, they start looking for other brands. It happens because either the

customer Demand centers do not handle the complaints or the customers are not able

to address them properly. Sometimes Calisium Carbonate, Demand providers take

considerably longer time to resolve the problems like Demand coverage or call

quality, the customers do not wait for long and hence they lose satisfaction with that

brand (Lee, 2006).

Furthermore, the friendly attitude and courteous behavior of the Demand workers at

Demand firm leaves a positive impression on the customer which lead towards

customer satisfaction. On the other hand, if Calisium Carbonate Demand provider

lacks in providing Demands (call groups) to its customers it experiences customer

chunk. (Kim, etal 2004) argued that Demand provider should provide customer

oriented Demands in order to heighten up customer satisfaction.

Demand Interaction: Interactions or Encounters between customers and employees

are a critical component of Demand quality. This is especially true for Demands

characterized by a high degree of person-to-person interaction and by the absence of

an exchange of tangible goods. The client comes away from Demand interaction with

feelings of satisfaction or frustration. Demand encounter is an interpersonal

association between the firm‘s staff and customers. Some Demand encounters are

very brief and consists of just a few discrete delivery steps, however, other may
extend over a long time frame and involve multiple steps. Therefore, the Demand

encounter often begins with submitting applications requesting Demand and placing

an order. Contact may take personal exchange between customers and Demand

employees or impersonal interaction with machine or computer. It is difficult to

improve Demand quality and productivity without full understanding of customer‘s

involvement in a given Demand environment. This study defines the Demand

encounter as the entire exchange between customer and Demand provider from the

initial contact through conclusion of the exchange (Rajasekhara, 2010).

Demand Delivery Process: Processes are the architecture of Demands, describing the

method and sequence in which Demand operating systems work and how they link

together to create the Demand experiences and outcomes that customers will value. In

high-contact Demands, customers themselves become an integral part of the

operation. Badly designed processes, often result in slow, frustrating, and poor-

quality Demand delivery and are likely to annoy customers. Cementilarly, poor

processes make it difficult for frontline staff to do their jobs well, result in low

productivity, and increase the risk of Demand failures. Organizations which are

involved in high-contact, people-processing Demand sector should design highly

convenient process blueprint for both frontline staff as well customers. This process

blueprint should clearly prescribes the sequence of actions while Demand delivery.

After completion of this kind of blueprint process document, organization‘s middle

level management should have the responsibility to oversee the Demand encounter

stage just to know the process is implementing according to blueprint or not. If any

discrepancy they have observed, they should correct it then and there itself. In the
meantime organization‘s think tank should identify where things are particularly at

risk of going wrong. From a customer perspective, the most serious fail points should

be better to identify and address them with utmost care. Demand delivery to

customers involves decisions about where, when, and how. At the time of Demand

delivery, there is also the possibility of delays between specific proceedings, requiring

the customers to wait. Very frequently, management should identify that kind of

locations and better to control the operations which are leading to delays in Demand

delivery. Through both continuous official research and on-the-job experience,

Demand managers can find out the nature of customer expectations at every stage of

Demand encounter. And bring in required modification in the existing Demand

delivery process to increase customer satisfaction. If any Demand firm failed to

identify the loopholes in their Demand delivery process, it is an uphill task for them

to retain the customers even though the firm is planning to introduce Demand

recovery as a healing strategy. Failure to ensure customer satisfaction, both initially

and belatedly, through Demand recovery could lead to a decline in customer

confidence, lost customers, negative word-of-mouth, possible negative publicity and

the direct cost of re- performing the Demand (Berry and Parasuraman, 1992). In

essence, the Demand firm‘s true test of commitment to Demand quality and customer

satisfaction depends on how it responds after disconfirmation. Effective managerial

responses depend, however, on effective research of the phenomenon. Unfortunately,

several limitations in consumer complaint behavior research have been noted.

The explanation above suggested that the importance to firms of ensuring that if

something goes wrong, then there is a mechanism in place to recover it. Of greatest
importance in the Demand recovery process is the assurance that customers have a

dedicated means by which they can express their dissatisfaction. A range of

techniques must be used to ensure customers have adequate means by which they can

register their views. ―Self-completion questionnaires‖ are the most commonly used

of these as they are able to identify all potential problems. They may also be

completed once the Demand has been received, either immediately or at a later date.

However, if the latter option is taken and a complaint is registered, there is little an

organization can do to recover the situation. Therefore a more customer-focused

approach is required. Rather than to depend on the Demand recovery system, it’s

better to concentrate more on curbing the minus points in the Demand delivery

process based on old proverb ―prevention is better than cure.

To ensure customers are satisfied, staff members can be selected to walk around the

Demand area checking that all needs are being properly met. This ensures that

customers can voice their dissatisfaction in an environment where the situation may

be considered and rectified. It is here that a professional and efficient Demand

recovery process operates. Successful Demand recovery strategies can restore

customer satisfaction and can also influence other important organizational outcomes

including loyalty, positive and negative word of mouth behavior, and profitability.

Poorly executed Demand recovery tends to exacerbate customer

dissatisfaction, may drive customers to competing firms and, at the very least,

encourages customers to badmouth the organization. (Ibd)

Customer Complaint Handling Procedure and Its Outcome: Most of the

organizations in these days have treated customer handling procedure as a strategic

marketing tool. Demand providers are frequently exhorted to strive towards a ―zero

defects‖ Demand; the ability to ―get it right first time‖ is thought to offer significant

benefits to organizations in terms of both customer evaluations and costs of delivery

(Schaefer and Christine, 2005). If any organization is striving for zero defects, they

need not give that much importance for complaint handling sections. In practice, it is

often difficult to imagine how Demand providers can attain such a goal, not least

because of the inherent heterogeneity in Demand provision and limitations on the

extent to which a provider can control the range of different interactions with

customers. In general, customers are complaining with four major ideas like to get

compensation, find expression for their anger, and help to improve the Demand and

for unselfish reasons. Demand organizations should build up the culture of

straightforwardly to invite the complaints with a motive to improve the Demand and

with selfless reasons. And at the same time, organizations should be cautious enough

about the complaining nature of some consumers with an intention to demand

compensation and spoil company image. Whatever the reason in the customer mind

behind the complaining nature, that is irrelevant to the organization. Their main

accountability is to genuinely solve the complaint and be successful in explaining the

reasons for that in a convincing way. However Demand businesses in advance clearly

recognize the various reasons behind the complaining nature of the market and should

devise special strategies to give a legitimate reason. And another important element in

this aspect, organizations has to develop complaint procedure with minimum of fuss.

If customers are treating complaint procedure is too lengthy and clumsy, it will also

affect the performance of entire organization. Thus, organizations should be very

watchfully design the complaint procedure with minimum of paper work. Related to

the outcome of the complaints, market has one strong notion i.e. result always in

favor of organization whatever the problem, whoever the reason for that. The market

is feeling that they are not treated fairly and far away for adequate justice. This kind

of belief in the market is more dangerous for any business in the present day‘s highly

cut-throat competitive business world. Therefore, while analyzing the complaints,

Demand firms’ complaint handling sections should be more vigilant in finding the

legitimate reasons and also the responsibility to provide ample justice to the

customers’ community. This class of legitimate judgment will give great confidence

in the minds of customers while solving their indisputable problems and in turn

increase the image of the firm. Finally, Demand firms should be better to realize the

importance of complaint handling procedure and its outcome and also well again to

bring into play this one as a strategic marketing tool to accomplish the benefits such

as customer satisfaction, customer loyalty, favorable word-of-mouth publicity, and to

decrease litigation.

Price Fairness

According to Kotler and Armstrong (2010) price is the amount of money charged for

a product or Demand, sum of the values that customer exchange for benefits of

having or using the product or Demand while Stanton, Micheal and Bruce (1994)

define price as the amount of money or goods needed to acquire some combination of

another goods and its companying Demands. Price fairness refers to consumers’

assessment of whether a seller’s price is reasonable, acceptable or justifiable (Xia et

al., 2004; Kukar-kinney, Xia and Monroe, 2007) as cited by Rajasekhara. Price
fairness is a very important issue that leads toward satisfaction. Therefore changing

fair price helps to develop customer satisfaction and loyalty. Research has shown that

customer’s decision to accept particular price has a direct bearing at satisfaction level

and loyalty and indirectly. In another study of Herrmann et al., (2007), it was

concluded that customer satisfaction is directly influenced by price perception while

indirectly through the perception of price fairness. The price fairness itself and the

way it is fixed and offer have a great impact on satisfaction. According to

Lommeruda and Sorgan (2003), as cited by Rajasekhara, 2010 Calisium

Carbonatemunication Demands are like undifferentiated product therefore, customers

are not price sensitive all the times and sometimes brand loyalty takes part in brand

preferences. This is the reason; some customers are retained with old monopolists.

Perceptions of Equity or Fairness

Did I get the same price? Did I treat other customers in the same way? Did the price

match the Demand? These are a few common questions that can haunt customers. It

is easy to satisfy a customer by offering him or her certain product or Demand, but it

is more difficult to consistently maintain that satisfaction level. In order to achieve

this objective an organization must focus on after sales Demands, such as Demand

recovery.

Demand recovery refers to the actions taken by an organization in response to a

Demand failure (Gronroos, 1988) as cited by Al-Shuaib). The main reason customers

switch is Demand failure and failed Demand recoveries. Therefore, in order to

enhance customer satisfaction, build customer relationships, and prevent customer

defections, an organization must have well executed Demand recoveries.

Therefore, it is essential for an organization to understand customer expectations and

have a plan to implement a perfect solution for Demand recovery (Al-shuaib, 2010).

Other Customers, Family Members and coworkers

Other Demand users, such as family members, friends and coworkers, can affect

customer satisfaction. Their perceptions, feedback, reaction, and expression of

products and Demands play a significant role in customer satisfaction.

In the end it can be concluded that customer satisfaction is a broader concept than

Demand quality as Demand focuses specifically on the dimensions of Demand

(Zeithaml et al., 2006).

According to the literatures the role of quality Demand which includes (Demand

interaction, Demand delivery process and compliant handling procedure) and price

fairness are substantial for customer satisfaction. Therefore this study will also

incorporate and evaluate these factors and their effects on customer satisfaction level

of Ethio Calisium Carbonate.

2.3 Cement Demand in Africa

According to the survey conducted by Tom Phillips, et al on African Cement

Observatory (2011), Driving Economic and Social Development through Cement

Demands of 25 countries which contain 91% of the continent’s Cement

connections the Cement Demand of the continent are described as follows.

SUMMARY

The literature views satisfaction as:

1. some type of affective, cognitive, and/or conative response.

2. based on an evaluation of product-related standards, product consumption

experiences, and or purchase-related attributes (e.g., salesperson).

3. expressed before choice, after choice, after consumption, after extended

experience, or just about any other time a researcher may query consumers about

the product or related attributes.

As noted above, opinions conflict about each component of satisfaction. Furthermore,

definitions vary quite dramatically in the number of components they include as well as

the detail they provide. Some definitions only address a limited number of issues in a

very general fashion. For example, Fornell (1992) describes satisfaction as Cementply

"an overall postpurchase evaluation." Other definitions include explicit detail about all

the components. To illustrate this, Tse and Wilton (1988) include all three components

with some detail in their definition:

"the consumer’s response to the evaluation of the perceived discrepancy

between prior expectations (or some norm of performance) and the actual

performance of the product as perceived after its consumption" (p. 204).

Clearly, this attempt to develop an inclusive, summary definition of satisfaction is both

unwieldy and internally inconsistent. Most problematic is that none of these definitions in

the literature pass the adequacy test of a theoretically meaningful nominal definition; i.e.,

the nominal definition can replace the term, consumer satisfaction, and maintain the
"truth value" in all situations (Teas and Palan 1997, p. 55). However, a generic structure

is evident: Consumer satisfaction is a response to a particular purchase or consumption-

related aspect occurring at a specific point in time.

Group interviews revealed a Cementilar view of satisfaction as gleaned from the

literature; however, there were a number of notable differences. Group interview

participants almost uniformly used affective terms to define satisfaction. In addition, they

rarely discussed expectations as a focus of satisfaction. Lastly, because their satisfaction

was based on specific experiences, they also tended to view the timing of the satisfaction

response within a much more specific, but varied time frame. Therefore, we might

summarize the view of satisfaction based on group interview responses as:

1. an affective response of varying intensity.

2. based on an evaluation of product attributes-benefits-performance, relevant

people, information provided by others or researched, purchase/consumption

experiences, and/or consumer-derived foci (e.g., needs, wants, decision,

expectations, etc.).

3. time-specific to before purchase, after purchase but before consumption, during

consumption, or after consumption.

Personal interview data confirmed the affective tendency of satisfaction. In addition,

multiple foci were discussed including expectations and performance standards.

Satisfaction was generally viewed as occurring at purchase or initial consumption, but

could be monitored throughout the consumption experience. Thus, the interview

respondents viewed satisfaction as:

1. an affective response of varying intensity.

 2. based on an evaluation of products and other standards of comparison.

3. at the time of purchase or temporal points during consumption and lasting for a finite

but variable amount of time.

A GENERAL DEFINITIONAL FRAMEWORK OF CONSUMER SATISFACTION

Based on the insights provided by the literature review, group and personal interviews,

we propose a framework for developing context-specific definitions of consumer

satisfaction. This framework is not a generic definition of satisfaction. As noted above,

innumerable contextual variables will affect how satisfaction is viewed. As such, any

generic definition of satisfaction will be subject to chameleon effects. Rather than

presenting a generic definition of satisfaction, we identify the conceptual domain of

satisfaction, delineate specific components necessary for any meaningful definition of

satisfaction, and outline a process for developing context-specific definitions that can be

compared across studies.

As concluded by the literature review and validated by the group and personal interview

data, there appears to be three essential components of consumer satisfaction:

1. summary affective response which varies in intensity;

2. satisfaction focus around product choice, purchase and consumption; and

3. time of determination which varies by situation, but is generally limited in duration.

In this framework, satisfaction is limited to an affective response reflecting satisfaction as

a holistic evaluative outcome. This distinction does not preclude the importance of

cognitions in determining satisfaction; however, cognitions are bases for the formation of
satisfaction, but the cognitions are not satisfaction. This is Cementilar to choice in that

the brand chosen may be based on cognitive evaluations; however, the choice is not a

cognition but the brands selected or not selected.

The summary affective response is defined as the holistic nature of consumer’s state of

satisfaction, the focus is the object(s) of consumer’s state, and timing refers to the

temporal existence of satisfaction. According to field data results and supported by extant

satisfaction literature, these components are applicable across situations and across

consumers. All of these components are critical to appropriately operationalize the

definition, to produce valid results, and make accurate interpretations and managerial

decisions. Thus, the following components should be included in any context specific

definition of consumer satisfaction.

Consumer satisfaction is:

A summary affective response of varying intensity. The exact type of affective

response and the level of intensity likely to be experienced must be explicitly defined

by a researcher depending on the context of interest.

With a time-specific point of determination and limited duration. The researcher

should select the point of determination most relevant for the research questions and

identify the likely duration of the summary response. It is reasonable to expect that

consumers may consciously determine their satisfaction response when asked by a

researcher; therefore, timing is most critical to ascertain the most accurate, well-

formed response.

Directed toward focal aspects of product acquisition and/or consumption. The

researcher should identify the focus of interest based on the managerial or research
 question they face. This may include a broad or narrow range of acquisition or

consumption activities/issues.

By fleshing out these components, researchers should be able to develop specific

definitions that are conceptually richer and empirically more useful than previous

definitions. To develop context-relevant definitions and measures, researchers must be

able to identify both the questions they are interested in answering and some basic

information about the setting and consumers. Specifically, the researcher will need to

provide details about all three components of satisfaction.

Satisfaction Focus - The difficult decision for a researcher is to determine the degree of

detail needed to define the satisfaction focus. For example, is satisfaction with the

product an appropriate focus (e.g., the autoCement), or should it be limited to specific

attributes (e.g., gas mileage) or specific benefits (e.g., the autoCement is fun to drive)?

One way researchers could identify the appropriate focus or foci is by surveying or

interviewing existing or new customers during the purchase process or at various points

following purchase (Gardial et al. 1994). This information would allow researchers to

segment their customers on the basis of what foci are actually considered when they

determine their satisfaction. The purpose would be to develop a battery of satisfaction

survey instruments tailored to different types of customers and research questions.

Timing - As noted above, there are two important properties related to timing; time of

determination and duration. When examining time of determination, the researcher must

identify which stage of the purchase and consumption process is most important to the

research question. For example, if an autoCement manufacturer is interested in repeat

purchase, then the final stages of consumption may be most appropriate. On the other
 hand, if the firm were interested in improving the warranty program, then earlier stages

would be most appropriate. Duration will also help identify the most appropriate time of

determination to consider. For example, if satisfaction is fleeting, then it should be

measured earlier in the process.

Summary Response - The final step is to identify appropriate affective responses.

Intensity represents the key properties of response. Affective responses can vary

dramatically across a range of responses. For example, Cadotte, Woodruff and Jenkins

(1987) identify ten different types of affective descriptors that may be appropriate in a

restaurant setting. However, it is unreasonable to assume that all of these will be

appropriate in another specific context. Researchers must select descriptors that

accurately reflect the emotional responses to the relevant satisfaction focus. If the range

of intensity is too large, then there will be little variance in any measures of satisfaction.

If the range is too small, then the researcher does not obtain the maximum information

that the consumers can provide (Cox 1980).

DEFINITIONAL ADEQUACY

The proposed definitional framework lead the reader to question why satisfaction is

limited to an affective response rather than including cognitive and conative components.

Limiting satisfaction to affective responses is consistent with Oliver’s (1992) proposal

that, "satisfaction and dissatisfaction reflect the general affective tone" (p. 242). In

addition, the phrases reflect a condensed, global response to one or many aspects of

purchase or consumption consistent with Zajonc’s (1980) conceptualization of affect

being a holistic concept. We would also argue that cognitive and conative components

tend to be more strongly related to antecedents and consequences of the satisfaction

determination. For example, cognitive deliberations (such as comparing performance to

expectations) reflect the process by which a summary evaluation (affect) is formed.

Conversely, a summary affective response may be later justified by cognitive

explanations (it just didn’t do what I wanted) or exemplified in behavior (repeat

purchase). Several definitions in Table 1 include process such as, "the consumer’s

response to the evaluation of the perceived discrepancy between prior expectations (or

some norm of performance) and the actual performance of the product as perceived after

its consumption" (Tse and Wilton 1988, p. 204, italics added). Our definition emphasizes

the construct itself rather than the evaluative process (model) by which the response is

determined. Focusing on the response (construct) rather than the process (model)

facilitates the operationalization of consumer satisfaction as a single construct

unencumbered by various antecedents or consequences.

In order to ensure our definitional framework is rigorous, we evaluated it according to

Teas and Palan’s (1997) definitional criteria: ambiguity; intensional vagueness; and

extensional vagueness. We will examine these criteria as suggested by Teas and Palan

(1997) consistently using the coined terms they have proposed and defined. Ambiguity is

the degree to which confusion "reduces the theoretical meaningfulness of language used

to express theory and, therefore, reduces the degree to which theories can be precisely

expressed, interpreted, and empirically tested" (Teas and Palan 1997, p. 56). In order to

be applicable across all contexts, our definitional framework must be somewhat

indefinite. Thus, by design, ambiguity exists in our general framework;

As noted by Teas and Palan (1997), some degree of intensional vagueness will exist

because an exhaustive list of properties is unlikely. Intensional vagueness is minimized

by our definitional framework because components and properties have been carefully

determined. Specifically, we have identified the affective response ranges in intensity

from minimal to extreme; the foci range across purchase and consumption response

sources (e.g., product benefits); and the timing ranges in determination from

immediately upon purchase to time of repurchase and ranges in duration from very

limited to enduring. In addition, properties of consumer satisfaction are well explicated in

the specificity of the operational definition. For example, for a specific context, consumer

satisfaction may be defined as an intense affective response (elation) to the product

benefits determined immediately upon purchase and lasting for a brief duration. This

affective response dissipates to enjoyment of product benefits enduring for the life of (or

consumer interaction with) the product. Thus, intensional vagueness is minimized by

using the framework to explicate the general properties of satisfaction or dissatisfaction

and guides the development of specific properties within a particular research setting.

Extensional vagueness, or lack thereof, is "the ability to classify objects in the physical

realm unambiguously into one of two sets: the extension of the concept or its complement

(nonextension)" (Teas and Palan 1997, p. 59). Extensional vagueness is reduced by our

definitional framework since the response, the focus of the response, and the timing

(determination and duration) are specified. Thus, it is possible to distinguish consumer

satisfaction from what consumer satisfaction is not. In particular, delineating the time

component greatly reduces extensional vagueness. For example, Teas and Palan (1997)
 examine the vagueness of prior expectations in terms of the point location along a time

continuum (when consumers actually determine their prior expectations) as well as the

point when expectations are actually measured by researchers. By applying our

definitional framework, the timing of the satisfaction response is ascertained and

measured at a temporally appropriate point, greatly alleviating extensional vagueness.

A context-specific definition generated using our framework (the definiens) could be

substituted for the term, consumer satisfaction (the definiendum), without falsifying the

statement. Thus, our definition adheres to the rules of replaCement. However, as

intended, our framework reduces the specificity of the conceptual domain so as to

appropriately modify (by increasing the specificity) the definition for any particular

context. As such, the context-specific definition used in one study cannot substitute for

the definition in another study. However, both definitions would have the same general

components and specific differences could be easily identified and compared. As such,

our framework would generate definitions that meet the requirement of replaCement

without creating chameleon effects.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

The satisfaction literature has not yet, explicitly or implicitly, established a generally

accepted definition of satisfaction, which has limited our abilities to develop appropriate

measures and compare results across studies. As suggested by Gardial et al. (1994), there

is a "need for a clear delineation of what this phenomenon is (and is not)" (p. 556). The

definitional framework presented above provides guidelines for developing conceptually

consistent, clearly delineated, context-specific definitions of satisfaction. By providing

 appropriate detail concerning the affective response, time of determination and duration,

and the focus of the response, a more meaningful definition of satisfaction can be

constructed. As encouraged by Marsh and Yeung (1999) context-specific definitions

created using the framework should be general enough to allow comparisons across

studies, but specific enough to allow for the development of context-specific measures in

order to prevent chameleon effects.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THEORY DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING

Consumer satisfaction researchers consider a consensual definition to be a priority in

furthering consumer satisfaction theory (Peterson and Wilson 1992; Yi 1990). This directive

is important for two reasons:

 A construct cannot be measured without an understanding of the domain of the

construct (Bollen 1989; Churchill 1979); and,

 Empirical studies can be compared only if Cementilar definitions and

operationalizations are employed.

Currently, it is impossible to disentangle differences in operationalizing satisfaction from

differences in results. This limits theoretical advanCements. Our proposed definition

framework allows researchers to identify the common and unique components of

different satisfaction studies. This will allow results to be more easily interpreted and

compared.

DEVELOPING MEASURES OF SATISFACTION

A consensual, yet adaptable, definition and underlying properties would increase the

validity of consumer satisfaction measures. Valid measures are essential for theory

development and testing (Peter 1981), yet, researchers do not always "recognize the
serious impact measurement error can have on empirical results" (Cote and Buckley

1988, p. 579). Valid measures put the emphasis back on developing and testing theory.

Having a grounded conceptual definition and a subsequent procedure for measuring the

construct should improve the construct validity of consumer satisfaction measures.

The proposed definitional framework provides the specificity to allow researchers to

develop context specific measures. When appropriate, researchers can develop measures

of satisfaction consistent with the conceptual definition and their research goals (e.g.,

satisfaction with a retailer or satisfaction one-month after purchase). Providing context-

specific measures will prevent chameleon effects which can cause the meaning of items

to vary depending on the other information presented in the questionnaire or research

context (Marsh and Yeung 1999). As Marsh and Yeung (1999) note, ". . . items referring

to a particular domain to be much more invariant across contexts than esteem items that

are specifically constructed to be content free, forcing participants to infer the relevant

domain or domains in forming their esteem responses" (p. 62). The definitional

framework we suggest helps researchers form clear statements of the relevant satisfaction

domains. By researching and understanding different types of customers and context,

researchers can tailor the satisfaction scale to more accurately reflect the consumer’s true

meaning of satisfaction. This allows researchers to move away from putting, ". . . too

much emphasis on global measures . . . instead of more specific self-concept scales that

are more closely related to the content of their research" (Marsh and Yeung 1999, p. 62).

Furthermore, the typical measurement problems of negative skewness and lack of

variability can be alleviated with scales reflecting appropriate endpoints. For example, in

contexts where consumers can be elated, a satisfied/dissatisfied scale does not

 discriminate adequately resulting in a clumping of positive responses (Peterson and

Wilson 1992). Changing the endpoints does not completely resolve these measurement

issues. Most likely, the ambiguity of the construct is the cause of negative skewness and

lack of variability; thus, making the satisfaction question more explicit (with proper

endpoints being only a part of this) should help to remedy these measurement problems.

IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGERS

Previous consumer research has examined and supported contextual relevance to

marketing strategies (Flynn and Goldsmith 1993; Foxall 1992). Prompted by general

inconsistencies, Peterson and Wilson (1992) asked: "To what extent do satisfaction self-

reports reflect 'true' satisfaction?" (p. 62). Managers need to know how their consumer

groups define satisfaction and then interpret satisfaction scales to accurately target,

report, and respond to satisfaction levels. Guided by our framework, managers should

conduct postpurchase segmentation, realizing that consumers vary with respect to the

components and related properties of satisfaction. Results suggest that different industries

may need to use different satisfaction scales, or a single industry may need to tailor scales

to different types of consumers. More importantly, managers can recognize that the

satisfaction focus and timing can be customized for their needs. Rather than looking at all

aspects of choice/consumption experience, managers can concentrate on those that are of

direct interest or are directly controllable. As a result, managers are able to obtain "true"

consumer responses that are relevant to managerial decision making.

Returning to the example in the introduction, consumer A, who marked a '5' on the

satisfaction scale, is answering the question based on how much enjoyment (even

excitement) s/he derived from the purchase experience, consumption experience, and
the product. Consumer A equates satisfaction with perfection (i.e., a little rattle or an

inconsiderate salesperson can rob Consumer A of some of the joy associated with this

autoCement). Also, Consumer A determines satisfaction almost immediately upon

purchase, and the satisfaction response is intense and enduring. On the other hand,

Consumer B, who marked a '7' on the satisfaction scale, considered the purchase a

necessity. S/he answered the question based on how well the product works; i.e., does

what it is supposed to do. The purchase experience is still important because Consumer B

is somewhat negatively predisposed about making the purchase at all. Consumer B waits

to determine satisfaction until consumption. The initial satisfaction response is weak

relative to Consumer A and, unless pleasantly or unpleasantly surprised, diminishes

during consumption. By applying our definitional framework, and appropriately

modifying its application to the context, a manager would recognize the differences

between Consumers A and B in the above example. They could also have phrased

satisfaction questions so that both consumers interpreted it the same way. By clarifying

what they meant by "satisfaction," management could have focused on comparable

responses upon which they could act.

Thus, regardless of whether Consumer A is less satisfied than Consumer B, Consumer A

(and others like Consumer A) should respond to a satisfaction scale that is appropriately

anchored with intense adjectives, such as excited or enthusiastic. Furthermore, the scales

should reflect the relevant foci of their satisfaction (purchase experience, consumption

enjoyment, and product attributes). These consumers should receive a survey instrument

as soon after purchase as possible and receive other appropriately-designed surveys later

during consumption. Satisfaction, in this case, may need to be considered as a within-

subject monitoring procedure (Peterson and Wilson 1992). On the other hand, since

Consumer B does not determine satisfaction until consumption, he/she should receive a

survey instrument later than Consumer A. The satisfaction scales should have less intense

endpoints that reflect a summary perception toward product benefits (i.e., satisfies needs).

Another industry may take a different approach. For example, consumers may not

determine whether they are satisfied at all; they Cementply are not dissatisfied (i.e., no

problems). When appropriate, satisfaction scales should reflect only the dissatisfaction

factor because these consumers do not consider satisfaction per se. As well, managers

may override the priority of the consumer’s perspective and ask satisfaction questions

relating to management’s particular areas of concern or interest.

In summary, firms must appropriately modify the basic components of consumer

satisfaction to develop a context-specific definition that will guide the assessment of

satisfaction. This measurement process is necessary to move closer to truly understanding

customers, and thus, to make better managerial decisions. Otherwise, it is virtually

impossible to interpret what consumers mean by the number they mark on a [Link]

Calisium Carbonate Demands have been recognized the as an important tool for

socioeconomic and political development for a nation and hence Calisium Carbonate

infrastructure is treated as a crucial factor to realize the socio-economic objectives in the

country. For realization of these objectives the Demand provided should be satisfying the

need and requirement of customers.

Customer satisfaction is related to the Demands provided by an organization for its

customers and how an organization meets customer expectations. It depends on a

products’ perceived performance in delivering value relative to a buyer’s expectations. If

the products performance falls short of the customer expectation, the buyer is dissatisfied.

If the products’ performance exceeds the customer expectation, the buyer is delighted.

Outstanding marketing companies go out of their way to keep their customers’ satisfied.

Satisfied customers make repeated purchases and they tell others about their good

experiences with the product. The key is to match customer’s expectations with company

performance. Smart companies aim to delight customers by promising only what they can

deliver, then delivering more than they promised customer satisfaction is closely linked

to the quality.

Therefore the concern of this study is addressing the main causes of customer

dissatisfaction on Cement Demand through different research techniques and suggesting

possible solutions. In addition the study provides higher officials of the company with

information regarding customer satisfaction that will help in company’s strategic

planning formulation and for the betterment of the overall customer handling techniques.

In general this paper comprises detailed analysis of customer satisfaction on Cement

Demand of Ethio Calisium Carbonate and its interpretation, literature review regarding

customer satisfaction and recommendation and conclusion that might be the basis for

company’s policy and strategic plan formulation regarding the factors that affect

customer satisfaction in Cement Demand.

Ethio Calisium Carbonate, former Ethiopian Calisium Carbonatemunication Corporation

(ETC) is the oldest sole and public Supervisor in the country as well as in Africa. It

provides both national and international Calisium Carbonatemunication Demands, using

communication media of satellite, optical fiber, microwave, multi-access radios, very

small aperture, ultra high frequency and very high frequency. Currently it provides
different major types of Demand packages such as landline and wireless fixed, Cement,

internet and data Demands for its government, business and private and other non-

government organizations, which are local and international. (Worku, 2005)

When we see the specific Demand package that will be studied in this research, the

Cement Demand, is the lately introduced Calisium Carbonate Demand in the country.

Though its introduction is only in 1999 it comprises the highest number of Customers and

covers the lion’s share of the revenue of the company than any of the other Demands.

Despite this the Cement Demand quality of the country is poor and its coverage is limited

in comparison to other African countries and the number of Customers is dramatically

increasing from year to year. The additional Demands given under Cement Demand

beside voice call are short text message (SMS), video call; call waiting, call diverting and

internet on Cement are the main ones.

Though the Cement Demand in the country has a weakness it has shown rapid

improvements both in quality and quantity especially after the year 2004/05. The

complaints of the customers are also increasing with the expansion of the Cement

Demand. Customer complaints and customer satisfaction are inversely related. Increasing

customer satisfaction will decrease the number of complaints. However, it is not an easy

task to reduce customers’ complaints and maintain a high level of customer satisfaction.

On the other hand, organizations to put extra efforts towards handling these issues and

create satisfied customer for their survival and generating profit/meeting the objective.
Statement of the Problem

In the contemporary environment where business is expanding and competition is stiff

both nationally and internationally; doing business becomes a great challenge. Therefore,

in order to overcome this challenge organizations (businesses) are developing different

strategies to achieve their long run objective and for survival. One of the best strategies is

about satisfying the customer that ensures a long term growth and profitability of business.

Nowadays organizations are well aware of the benefits of retaining customers because

customer retention is least costly

and easy task than attracting new customers (Kotler, 2006). Customers are considered as

core concern for any organization whether it is Demand provider or manufacturing firm. As

a result no one is questioning the importance of customer satisfaction for the existence of

an organization. Though customer satisfaction has a great importance for the growth and

existence of an organization; customers are not satisfied with ethio Calisium Carbonate

Cement Demands in general and Global System Cement (GSM) Demand in particular. If we

look specifically at the central issue of this study (factors affecting customer satisfaction in

Cement Demand) the number of Customers and value added Demands are increasing from

time to time, but the users are not satisfied with the quality and availability of the Demand.

For instance from the year 2003/04 to 2007/08 the number of subscriber increased nearly

by five folds compared to the early year of its introduction. (ETC Statistical Bulletin,

2008/2009)

The main focuses of the study would be directed identifying the factors that influence

customer satisfaction in using GSM Demand and investigating how to respond towards
those factors in view of SERVQUAL model or the five Demand quality dimensions.

Research Questions

This research paper will try to answer the following questions.

 How do customers perceive the Demand quality of Cement Demand

provided by ethio Calisium Carbonate?

 Are the Customers satisfied by the Cement Demand provided by the

Supervisor (ethio Calisium Carbonate)?

 What are the main factors that affect customer satisfaction in Cement Demand usage?

 How do customers view ET Cement Demand from five Demand

quality dimension (tangibility, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and

empathy) point of view?

 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION RESEARCH

Introduction

This chapter entertains the general field of consumer (customer) satisfaction

research in a manner expanding upon more general treatises. Whereas the field has been studied

from many perspectives, the most common appearing in the areas of customer satisfaction

surveys and customer satisfaction strategy, an alternative approach will be proposed. Most

typically, works on customer satisfaction survey measurement take the form of “how to form

scales and summarize results,” and those on customer satisfaction strategy take the form of

“how to generate satisfied customers and alleviate dissatisfaction.” While these are worthy

endeavors, it remains that little in-depth analysis has been performed on conceptually-based

managerially actionable strategies within the satisfaction response.

Unfortunately, these early perspectives have not significantly advanced the progress of

satisfaction work for some time and it wasn’t until many and diverse perspectives were

integrated, elaborated, and extended that others began the study of conceptual satisfaction in

earnest. Here, the underlying mechanisms of how consumers construct, consciously or

subconsciously, their satisfaction conclusions are explored so that a grander strategy of fostering

satisfaction and diminishing dissatisfaction can emerge. This will allow new actionable

strategies resulting in more diverse practical implications for practice. Readers interested in

greater detail and elaboration, including discussion of topics not covered here, should consult the

author’s original work (Oliver, 1997).

Customer Satisfaction: What Is It?

Recent interpretations in the consumer domain now couch satisfaction as a fulfillment

response. Fulfillment implies that a consumption goal is known, as in basic motives of hunger,

thirst, and safety. However, observers of human behavior understand that these and other goals

can be and frequently are modified and updated in various ways. Thus, consumer researchers

have moved away from the literal meaning of satisfaction and now pursue this concept as the

consumer experiences and describes it.

In Oliver (1997, p. 13), the following definition has been proposed as being

consistent with the conceptual and empirical evidence to date:

Satisfaction is the consumer’s fulfillment response. It is a judgment that a

product or Demand feature, or the product or Demand itself, provided (or is

providing) a pleasurable level of consumption-related fulfillment, including

levels of under- or over-fulfillment.

Here, pleasurable implies that fulfillment gives pleasure or reduces pain, as when a problem in

life is solved. Thus, individuals can be satisfied just to get back to normalcy, as in the removal

of an aversive state (e.g., pain relief). Moreover, fulfillment is not necessarily limited to the case

of met needs. Over-fulfillment can be satisfying if it provides additional unexpected pleasure;

and under-fulfillment can be satisfying if it gives greater pleasure than one anticipates in a given

situation. Note that it has not been necessary to provide a separate discussion of dissatisfaction.

If the word displeasure is substituted for pleasure in the satisfaction definition, dissatisfaction

results. Thus, the displeasure of under-fulfillment typically is dissatisfying and, interestingly,

over-fulfillment may be dissatisfying if it is unpleasant – the case of “too much of a good thing.”
Related Concepts

A number of related, but important, concepts are frequently used interchangeably with

satisfaction, although closer inspection reveals that they are actually distinct from satisfaction

despite the fact that they may be related to satisfaction in various ways. (Those discussed here

are found in this chapter; a larger list is presented in Oliver, 1997). Generally, they represent

either the affective (liking/pleasure) or cognitive (thinking/judging) components of product and

Demand experience although some are hybrids of the two.

Within the antecedent categories, moods may play a role in satisfaction formation. These

are positive or negative feelings of a largely non-thinking nature, although certain events may

have preceded their appearance. Qualtiy, in contrast, is a cognitive judgment that summarizes

the exceptionally good (or bad) elements of the product, especially when compared to other

direct alternatives or offerings (brands). In a Cementilar vein, value is a judgment that compares

the likely outcomes of purchasing to the inputs forgone. Thus, value results when consumers

compare what is to be received (e.g., performance) to the acquisition costs (e.g., financial,

psychological, effort).

Another antecedent concept that is actually a hybrid affective-cognitive judgment is

attitude. It is a relatively stable judgment that a product or Demand has desirable or undesirable

properties. The judgment takes the form of a liking or disliking and is based on many separate

evaluations of product features. Whereas moods can emerge as pure feeling states, attitudes

result from deliberate processing of (product- or Demand-related) information. Unlike

satisfaction, consumers do not have to experience consumption to have formed an attitude; hence

attitudes can exist prior to purchase/usage.

 To be discussed, disconfirmation, also known as expectancy disconfirmation, is the result

of a comparison between what was expected and what was observed. In current satisfaction

parlance, it more commonly refers to an expectation-performance discrepancy. Consumers

would describe this concept in terms of performance being better than or worse than expected

with regard to a product or Demand. The first component of disconfirmation, expectation, is a

predisposing prediction – sometimes stated as a probability or likelihood – of attribute or product

performance. Performance itself is the perceived amount of product or Demand attribute

outcomes received, usually reported on an objective scale bounded by good and bad levels of

performance (e.g., courteous/discourteous Demand). This is frequently confused with quality, a

judgment of performance excellence. Although frequently substituted for satisfaction, recent

data suggest the concepts are separate and distinct.

In the domain of the consequences of satisfaction, a major concept is that of loyalty.

Brand loyalty is a deeply rooted commitment to repurchase a product or repatronize a Demand in

the future. It is not to be confused with repeat purchasing, which may involve constrained or

happenstance (e.g., random) repetitive behavior. Although related to satisfaction, loyalty will be

mentioned only briefly in the close of this chapter as research as to its meaning is ongoing.

Other consequences are more fully discussed. These include repurchase intentions,

recommendations, and word-of-mouth. A complete graphic of satisfaction’s antecedents and

consequences, as discussed here, appears in Figure 27.1.

Measurement Issues: Satisfaction Scales

Having defined and delineated satisfaction and related concepts, discussion proceeds to

measurement more generally. This section will be necessarily brief because many reference sources are

available (e.g., Chakrapani, 1998; Myers, 1999) and because measurement in general has been studied for

some time. This section will also serve the purpose of a recapitulation of past research and as a prelude to

the final section where measures are suggest based on the conceptual framework used here.

At this point, it will be helpful if the reader appreciates that, like attitude, satisfaction is a hybrid

concept composed of both an affective component (pleasure) and a cognitive component (e.g., extent of

need fulfillment) as in the previous definition – but after the purchase and use situation (i.e., after

disconfirmation has been experienced). Thus, it is assumed that, when a consumer affirms that “I am

satisfied (dissatisfied),” both of these components are inherent in the reply. This understanding is useful if

one wishes to expand a satisfaction scale with the use of affect-related or cognition-related “cousins.”

Discussion begins with Cementple verbal (qualitative) statements of the form elicited when

respondents are interviewed about their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with a product or Demand episode.

Using a phone interview as an example, the respondent would be read the five categories of: (1) very

satisfied, (2) satisfied, (3) neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, (4) dissatisfied, and (5) very dissatisfied, and

asked to select one. This question would usually be asked once per attribute, product, etc. up to the point

of respondent fatigue, a critical factor in phone surveys.

For this reason, many prefer printed questionnaires which can be completed at the respondent’s leisure.

Whether measuring satisfaction with attributes or products, single item scales of this nature, while

appearing to give discrete, unambiguous answers, have no inherent reliability unless they are read

ministered – an impracticality. Validity is also suspect if one were to test a single, five-point satisfaction

response against many other factors thought to influence satisfaction. In the case of a negatively skewed
distribution of satisfaction scores – the typical case with the bulk of data in the satisfied region – the

variance in this variable would be very restrictive and validation would be compromised.

At a level more reliable than that that of one-item scales, multi-item scales can be formed that include a

satisfied/dissatisfied “anchor” along with items tapping related concepts. For example, the researcher

could include feelings (pleasant/unpleasant), stronger emotions (anger/delight), attitude-based

(like/dislike), and cognitive (high/low performance) descriptors. (See the preceding discussion and Figure

27.1.) This method is frequently performed, but the scale produced (frequently through addition or

weighted combination) is now one of a mixed nature. If carefully constructed, however, with the use of

close relatives of satisfaction, the reliability will be very good. Validity is also considerably improved

because each item in the multi-item scale adds to the available variance for testing.

At a still higher level, the companion descriptors can be composed of items reflecting conceptually-

based antecedents and consequences of satisfaction. This will require an understanding of the causal

basis (i.e., expectancy disconfirmation in the present case) for making satisfaction judgments, the

content of the remaining sections of this chapter. An example will be provided later after all concepts

have been discussed.

Measurement Issues: Scaling

For predictive purposes, a minimum of three scale points is recommended, particularly for phone

surveys. As the number of points becomes large, exceeding ten for example, problems of interpretation

are introduced. One reason is that consumers tend to use sub-intervals of very long scales, such as

restricting responses to an interval of five points on a ten-point scale. Thus, one respondent's "7" may be

another's "9" for the same perceived performance level. In effect, these consumers are interpreting the

scale's meaning in a manner not known to the researcher.

An exception is the “chances in 10” scale. When percentages have clear meaning in the

context used, this 11-point scale (0 to 100%) is admissible. In particular, “50-50” –

 representing a true midpoint, is easily understood.

Odd or Even Number of Items: The Issue of a Midpoint

The previous discussion addresses the debate over whether there should be an even or

odd number of items in a scale. Consider the following two alternatives:

(1) Bad 1 2 3 4 5 6 Good

(2) Bad 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Good

In (1), there is no midpoint and respondents who believe that the feature is neither bad nor good are

forced to commit themselves to answering with a “3” or with a “4,” the first suggesting modestly

negative feelings, the second modestly positive. In (2), this respondent can comfortably respond with a

"4." Opponents of the second scale argue that there is no information in "fence-sitting" and that few, if

any consumers are really neutral toward features and products. This author disagrees in that neutrality is

information and the percentage of respondents who feel this way may provide the researcher with

additional insight. For the above and other reasons, use five to seven points. Three is permissible if

attention spans, brevity, or respondent fatigue operate, while 11-point scales work nicely for chances-in

10 responses.

Because consumers tend to rate products positively, particularly with regard to satisfaction, most

ratings are skewed, with the bulk of responses in the positive half of the scale. This tendency is more

pronounced for scales with a smaller number of points (e.g., three and four – the latter not

recommended). In fact, this issue also answers the question of “what a good satisfaction score is.” The

shape of the score distribution is a very revealing quality. Poor scores are represented by a “normal”

distribution peaking at the scale midpoint. Good scores peak near the upper (positive) extreme and then

decline before reaching the extreme. Excellent scores, in contrast, rise continuously up to the upper
extreme of the scale without falling.
A Satisfaction Model Useful for Current Research

At this point, it would be helpful to envision the framework upon which this chapter is

based. If one can construct the antecedents of the satisfaction response, that is, how a consumer

consciously or unconsciously constructs satisfaction, many conceptual and measurement issues

will fall into place. It is this author’s position that the most useful model of this process is the

expectancy disconfirmation framework, as shown in the middle (unboxed) section of Figure

As portrayed in the middle area of Figure 27.1, expectations, whether measured before or after

consumption (predicted or recalled – retrospective – expectations), and performance are compared

to form an “objective” (or gap) disconfirmation level; objective disconfirmation provides the basis

for a subjective interpretation of this expectation-performance difference; and subjective

disconfirmation is direct cause of satisfaction. Additionally, the performance- satisfaction link

represents the direct effect of performance on satisfaction not channeled through disconfirmation.

Dashed arrows represent links to and from recalled expectations and gaps. These variables may or

may not be collected by the researcher (to be discussed).

This middle graphic represents the "expectancy disconfirmation with performance model."

For discussion purposes, we begin with the most common treatment of satisfaction, that of

performance influences. This is followed by discussion the expectation and disconfirmation

variables. As noted, the chapter concludes with brief discussions of the short-term consequences of

satisfaction, namely repurchase intention and communications to the firm and other consumers.

The Performance of Features (Attributes)

In an all-too-familiar research scenario, much of satisfaction research is conducted according

to the following format: A list of key product or Demand features is generated which, hopefully,

contains an exhaustive set of factors thought to cause satisfaction and dissatisfaction. In a fairly
direct manner, consumers are asked to retrospectively rate the product or Demand on the degree to

which each of the features was delivered. At the same time, the consumer may be asked to rate the

product on an overall basis or on satisfaction. An assumption of this technique is that those features

which are more aligned with the overall score across consumers (high feature scores corresponding

to satisfaction; low feature scores to dissatisfaction) are those which have the greatest impact.

Despite the ubiquity of this method, problems are inherent in its implementation. One

problem is that the list of features cannot be exhaustive for all consumers. A second problem arises

from the disparate goals of consumers (need fulfillment) versus those of designers, engineers, and

manufacturing personnel. In part, this problem can be addressed by using the proper level of feature

abstraction when preparing the attribute list (to be discussed). Another problem, discussed next, is

that of the relevance of features at different stages of decision- making.

Satisfaction Drivers vs. Choice Criteria

In pursuing the reasons behind the consumer's satisfaction response, it should be borne in mind

that the researcher's goal is to determine the correct feature list of satisfaction drivers, as opposed to

product or Demand choice criteria. A common mistake is that of assuming the features consumers use

in selecting a product from a list of alternatives are identical to the set of features that play into

satisfaction and dissatisfaction judgments. Although many of the choice features will also be those

used in forming satisfaction judgments, the assumption that the choice feature set and the satisfaction

set are identical or even Cementilar has been shown to be incorrect.

Consider summer vacation travel. Some features, such as the availability of travel and lodging, are

used by the consumer only in the choice phase of decision-making. The combined cost of the travel

package could be an example. A consumer may shop for the lowest total monetary outlay. Once found,

this cost ceases to be a factor in satisfaction with the trip, which may be months away.
 As an example of a "pure" satisfaction driver, certain destination amenities such as air conditioning

would provide an example of this situation. Brownouts and equipment failures could not have been

predicted previously and any hotel stay in the destination locale is randomly subject to this effect.

Other features are examples of mixed or dual influence, affecting both choice and satisfaction to

the same degree. Prevailing weather patterns in the chosen destinationwould be an example of this

phenomenon. Although the vacation planner has no control over the actual weather encountered,

destinations are chosen for their expected weather; mother nature is fickle in this regard.

Thus, for all these reasons, researchers are advised to determine satisfiers and dissatisfiers

independently of choice determinants. Additionally, the prior discussion illustrates why a satisfaction

measure is preferred to one of attitude or quality if consumer satisfaction is, in fact, the goal of the firm.

This is so because both attitude and quality judgments are used in choice and thus may give a distorted

picture of the features most strongly related to satisfaction.

Levels of Feature Abstraction

An additional concern early in the satisfaction measurement process is determination of how

specific the feature list should be. This issue addresses whether the list is to contain detailed "micro"

dimensions of a product or micro-behaviors of a Demand provider, or if it is to contain more general

dimensions of higher abstraction. As noted, consumers may think at higher levels of consumption goals

whereas management must think in terms of the details of product or Demand design. It is also the case

that many intricacies of product engineering are not understood by the lay consumer.

An obvious drawback to the micro-dimension approach is that the list of feature experiences

presented to consumers becomes overly long despite the fact that it can contain maximum diagnostic value

– value deriving from the fact that specific details of a (dis)satisfying situation will be singled out for

study. In an alternative approach operating at a higher level of abstraction, the researcher can Cementply
have consumers rate the consumable on, for example, quality, value and need satisfaction (met my needs).

Note, however, that this Cementple list of three overarching criteria of the consumption experience does

not provide design details required by management. This leaves management with a bare minimum of real

actionable conclusions.

The answer to the level of abstraction problem can be found in two areas. The first relates to

progress made in determining key features; that is, whether management is in the early exploratory phases

of discovery or whether analysis is closer to identifying critical problem dimensions. Greater specificity

should be more appropriate at the exploratory study phases. The second area reflects the nature of data

collection. Greater specificity requires longer lists of features. If issues of questionnaire length,

respondent apathy or fatigue, and inadequate incentives are in play, then shorter, more abstract feature

lists are required. The lack of diagnosticity will have to be compensated for in other ways, such as the

inclusion of open-ended sections of the survey.

Scaling Feature Performance

In this section, it is assumed that an “optimal for the purpose” list of critical features has been generated.

This list can be constructed in many ways including “intuition” (not recommended) and from inputs

provided internally within the firm, from channel middlemen, and from consumers. The latter source can

be tapped in many ways including focus groups, correspondence with the firm – including complaining

data, and from various forms of survey research. Readers are directed to other works within this volume

of readings.

Because performance is measured ex post in satisfaction surveys, the questions are typically worded in the

past tense. Other, more pressing, measurement issues also require attention. These are the polarity of the

performance items and whether or not one wishes to also include the valence (positivity or negativity) of

the performance rating. Issues concerning thenumber of scale points, and secondarily, a preference for
whether the number should be odd or even, have been discussed previously in the context of measurement

issues.

Polarity

All performance dimensions have some ability to underperform or to negatively

perform.

Take the case of a stain remover and presume that "cleansing stains" is the basic performance dimension.

Consider the following scales:

(1) Doesn’t cleanse Cleanses

(2) Partially cleanses Cleanses

In practice, researchers would put numbers under the horizontal lines and between the

endpoints. These endpoints are referred to as poles and the issue is whether the negative pole

should be truly negative or something less. Scale (1) assumes that the worst the stain remover

can do is not lift stains. Scale (2) presumes only that the cleanser partially, but not fully, lifted

stains.

Which scale assumption should be followed? The best answer is that the scale should

encompass the experience of the users responding to the survey. If consumers have access to

the better oxy-based cleansers on the market, scale (2) may be best. However, if one is

sampling consumers using home remedies, possibly scale (1) may be necessary.
Handling the Case of an Ideal Point

Often, the desired performance level exists at some level less than the maximum limits of

performance. The carbonation level of a soft drink is an oft-cited example. Consider, again, alternative

scales:

(1) Not carbonated xxxXxx Highly carbonated

(2) Not carbonated Ideally carbonated

In scale (1), the "positive" pole has been labeled as some unspecified maximum level of performance. The

"X" marks an individual consumer's preferred level of carbonation, at least subjectively, while the lower-

case x's represent the range of other consumers' preferences. Scale

(1) has little value if the range of the x's is not known to the researcher. In fact, a rightmost

score on this scale may be interpreted as maximally fulfilling when, in fact, it represents a

level of carbonation that is excessive to most consumers. Scale (2) overcomes this problem if

the researcher wishes high scores to represent maximum performance as viewed by the

consumer, but unfortunately does not inform as to what “ideal” is. Experimentation is

necessary to unravel this dilemma. Another solution is provided next.

Valence

Note that no mention has been made of how good (or bad) the cleansing of stains is to the consumer. In

this and many cases, the feature itself connotes a goodness or badness; removing stains connoting a

desired feature and, in a worst case example, “setting stains” connoting an undesired feature. For this

reason, most surveys do not separately measure the valence of performance. However, there are many

other situations where a valence must also be measured. The preceding carbonation example illustrates

one such case. If a consumer finds carbonation undesirable, then the only favorable rating for this
consumer is the "not carbonated" pole on the scale. The researcher, however, may interpret this as a

negative response. Thus the consumer must also be asked if the degree of carbonation he/she believes the

beverage contains is good or bad or likable or not as follows:

This level of carbonation is: Bad Good

or: Undesirable Desirable

This separate measurement of valence can be avoided if the researcher is able to include valence in the

feature description. Consider the following:

Low gas mileage High gas

mileage Poor gas mileage Good gas

mileage

While these two alternatives appear almost identical, and in practice may yield equivalent results, there is

a subtle distinction between them. In the first, one is not able to determine if high gas mileage is believed

to be desirable (or even important!) to the respondent. In the second, one has no idea what range of

mileage is considered “good.”

Temporal Survey Issues

A last issue in performance measurement vis-à-vis satisfaction is the issue of whether the satisfaction

measure(s) should precede or follow attribute performance measurement. This issue becomes very critical

because the logic of the survey comes into play. If satisfaction measurement comes first, a general halo

effect may occur whereby attribute performance is seen to conform to the overall judgment. If

performance measures precede satisfaction, then satisfaction may be colored by the first few (primacy)

attributes or the last few (recency) attributes.

One solution is to randomly split the surveys into those with satisfaction first, then second. Logic issues
can then be measured and resolved. Note that this does not solve the primacy/recency effects in the

attribute list. Randomization of the list will partially address this. However, this author’s experience is

that randomization promotes greater correlations (multicollinearity) in the attribute list. There are

problems here that defy solution.

Expectations and Their Measurement

Expectations Defined

Generally, an expectation is an anticipation of future consequences based on prior experience and other

many and varied sources of information. Expectations can also be described as a comparative referent for

performance. The reason is that performance alone is an unreferenced concept. Meaning is attached only

when performance can be compared to some standard. In an elementary sense, the adjectives "good" and

"bad" suggest the operation of a "goodness" standard, although they provide little diagnostic value to

management as the terms have highly variable meaning across consumers. Diagnosticity is increased as

the standard becomes less ambiguous and more objective to the point that it can be measured.

In fact, any number of referents can be used in later satisfaction assessments, but all become

channeled into expectations when the product or Demand is purchased. The concept of needs, discussed

previously, is one of the many referents available to consumers. These same consumers, however, will

pursue only those products which they expect to fulfill their needs. Thus, the expectation and not the need

is what the consumer brings into the purchase.

Oftentimes the expectation and need will overlap exactly, becoming interchangeable.

Multiple Expectation Referents (Standards)

Frequently, consumers express different variations of what they would prefer a product deliver.

At one level, they may have an ideal perception of a product offering, something they wish they could

receive in a perfect world. Others, or the same consumer at a different time expect only what they believe
the firm’s product can or will deliver. Researchers have referred to these two different perceptions as

ideal and predicted expectations or, alternatively, as should and will or desired and likely outcomes. By

measuring both of these expectation levels, the firm will be in a better position to understand how their

offering compares to what consumers really want and how their offering stacks up against those of their

competitors. If both ideal and predictive expectations are actively processed, the researcher may have to

allow for the measurement of multiple levels.

A number of research investigations have established that consumers do indeed recognize and use

multiple levels of expectations or standards. Among the most common of these are studies investigating

the influence of normative (should) and predicted (will) expectations, or alternatively, ideal and expected

referents. The results of all studies tend to be Cementilar. When the ideal or should level of expectations

was the referent, satisfaction was lower than when actual expected or predicted expectations were used.

This implies rather convincingly that high expectations can frustrate satisfaction attainment. Moreover,

these studies generally conclude that consumers do entertain multiple standards and that inclusion of more

than just the predicted level may improve a model's ability to understand satisfaction. Researchers are

encouraged to measure both if the study design permits as the expectation measure must be taken twice.

Expectations: Examples of Measures

The measurement of expectations essentially asks consumers to place likelihood estimates on

specific occurrences of product or Demand performances in the future. Consumers may also be asked to

place likelihood estimates on events which have already occurred (to be discussed), a practice

necessitated in many customer environments, such as emergency rooms, where the identity of clientele

can not be known a priori. Discussion centers, first, on the measurement of actual predictive

expectations, those which are estimated before the occurrence of an event. In this sense, these

expectations are proactive, or proactively obtained by the researcher.

Predictive (Proactive) Expectations

In most consumption situations, consumers will hold valenced expectations – for the basis of

purchase and acquisition is to obtain products with pleasant consequences and to avoid those with

potentially unpleasant outcomes. Thus, “high” expectations reflect the possibility that desirable events

will occur and/or that undesirable events will not occur, while “low” expectations suggest that desirable

events will not occur and/or that undesirable events will occur.

Note that valence is clearly indicated in these statements, phrased as desirabilities or

undesirabilities. In practice, the valence component of the expectation generally will be implied in the

wording of the expectation item on a survey. For example, one might refer to "good" gas mileage or use

words with a positive or negative connotation such as "praise from friends," "courteous servers," or

"delays on takeoff." In working with expectations in this manner, it is assumed that the performance

referent is also phrased in properly valenced fashion.

In measuring expectations before purchase or patronization, one must be careful to ensure that the

consumer sample has some basis for forming an expectation set. Consumers probably do go into many

purchases without complete expectation knowledge, but it would be rare for consumers not to have any

awareness of the product at all. At the minimum, the brand and price will be known to the consumer and

some individuals will use these to infer the remaining performance characteristics. Because of the

possibility that some elements of the expectation set will not be known to all consumers, however,

researchers should include a "don't know" category in the expectation section of the survey.

The types of expectation measures available to the researcher are straightforward. A number of

variations are shown here, including the familiar Likert version in agree-disagree format

If I complain, I will get a response: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (times in 10 tries) Brand X has

(possesses) feature Y:

Unlikely Likely Brand X will

satisfy my needs:

Disagree Neither Agree

There is no evidence that any one measure is better than another. Rather, the context of the

investigation should dictate the question format. For example, a "chances in 10" scale is better used when

the consumer has had a chance to sample the product over multiple purchases. A household staple and a

familiar restaurant both qualify as examples. In contrast, a likelihood format could be used for a first-time

purchase as could the agree-disagree scale.

Note that no example of "raw" product performance has been suggested, as in "The car will

average 35 miles per gallon." There are two problems with the use of such measures. First, "35 miles per

gallon" is a point estimate and, for any one consumer, expected performance could be above or below this

level. Second, it is not known whether this is a good or poor level of performance in the consumer's mind.

As noted, consumer research requires that the expectation have a connotation of valence so that the "pull

or push" of the expectation for purchase can be gauged. The first problem might be mitigated if the item

were reworded to say "at least 35 miles per gallon," but, again, it is not known if all consumers use this

cutoff to determine acceptable versus unacceptable performance. Perhaps the best way of handling this

situation is to phrase the question in terms of "good" or "high" mileage and permit the consumer to use an

internal standard of what good mileage is.

Ideal, Should, or Desired Expectations

A potential problem exists if the researcher wishes to tap expectations of ideal performance. In

short, ideal levels frequently run up against the well-known "ceiling effect," where respondents may wish

to check a scale response higher than the scale allows (e.g.,checking an "8" on a "1 to 7" scale). Because

expectations are measured on bounded scales, consumers frequently use the extreme positive pole to

represent ideal levels. Thus, expected ideal performance is "perfect" or "10 in 10" performance, or it is at
the upper range of the performance scale. However, ideal expectation levels are of value to management

and can be measured if the researcher takes care to word the measure so that ceiling effects are minimized.

There is some merit, in assessing the two levels of desired and predicted performance, as these

bound a broad range of the expectation region. As noted, this will require that consumers complete two

lists of expectation questions. Along with the other questions needed in studying satisfaction, the survey

may suffer from length and fatigue considerations. One solution is to use multiple samples of respondents

whereby one sample completes a survey with desired expectations and another with predicted

expectations.

Another solution is to place the desired and predicted scales side-by-side as in the following two

examples:

Medicine X: Hard to swallow: Should be Will be

Hard 1 2 3 4 5 Easy Hard 1 2 3 4 5 Easy

Courier X: Speed of delivery: Desired Predicted

Slow 1 2 3 4 5 Fast Slow 1 2 3 4 5 Fast

While this format provides some space-saving economies, the close juxtaposition of

the two forms of expectation questions may introduce a fairly obvious compound. The

researcher's goal, under this format, is somewhat more transparent than if the two sections

were widely separated. This is so because consumers may adopt a halo response set whereby

the "should" questions are always scored high and the "will" questions are scored, for

example, two scale units below.

Expectations after the Fact: Retrospective Expectations

Very frequently in satisfaction studies, the researcher cannot identify purchasers before

consumption and is therefore constrained to measure expectations at the same time that the levels of

performance and satisfaction are assessed. In this event, the expectation section of the survey should
appear before any other material, especially satisfaction. The wording of the question would conform to

the following general format: "Referring back to the time you first purchased the product (engaged the

Demand), what were your expectations at that point?" The subsequent list of attribute expectations would

then be worded in the following tense: "At the time I purchased the car, I believed that it would give me

good gas mileage."

Although these are not predictive expectations and raise some fairly important issues, three

reasons account for the majority of cases when the researcher is forced to rely on expectations ex post.

The first is Cementply neglect; the researcher was not aware of or saw no need for expectation

measurement prior to purchase and usage, and was content to make interpretations from the performance

ratings alone. A second reason is that some firms may not wish to suggest possible product experience to

consumers before usage. An example of this is the probability of breakdown and repair, or of

complaining outcomes.

The third reason is due to necessity; most firms cannot predict and do not have access to their

customers before they purchase the product. Virtually all tangibles sold at retail fit this description.

Producers first learn who their buyers are if and when warranty Bags are returned. Demands provide

greater latitude because the consumer can be intercepted before the Demand episode. However, it is still

true that the consumer, in most cases, has made an earlier decision to patronize the Demand and this

decision may affect expectation measurement in subtle ways. In both cases the researcher must rely on

the ability of the consumer to reflect back on what he/she thought the product/Demand would deliver. A

number of problems now become evident.

The most troubling is that the consumer will have already experienced the product's performance.

In this case, what the consumer has experienced and what he/she recalls will be confounded. Most

probably, the recalled expectations will be biased toward the experienced performance. One explanation
for this finding is that consumers with ill-defined expectations, perhaps because they are unfamiliar with

the product or Demand category, will construct "data- driven" or bottom-up strategies for responding to

expectations ex post. This may be especially true if the consumer feels that ill-formed expectations reflect

poorly on his/her judgment or decision-making skills, or if the survey appears to assume that consumers

are "supposed to have" expectations. Nonetheless, if proactive measurement can not or has not been

taken, the researcher will still be better served than if no expectation data had been collected at all.

Disconfirmation and Its Measurement

When consumers compare performance to their expectations, the response of disconfirmation,

more specifically disconfirmation of pre-performance standards, results. Because the early work in

consumer satisfaction was conducted with predictive expectations as a standard, the phrase

disconfirmation of expectations or "expectancy disconfirmation" has come to apply to this concept. Many

standards consumers bring to the consumption experience can be disconfirmed, so an alternative phrase to

describe the discrepancy from a standard could be Cementply "disconfirmation." In this section, the

phrases "expectancy disconfirmation" and "disconfirmation" will be used interchangeably.

In contrast to the lay interpretation of a disconfirmation, which usually connotes a negative

outcome, performance can also be favorably compared to expectations. This permits disconfirmation to

take on a positive as well as a negative value. In the same way that product performance can be worse

than expected, it can also be better than expected. Because the phrase disconfirmation without the valence

qualifier is ambiguous as to direction, the phrase "negative disconfirmation" will be used to refer to the

negative discrepancy that occurs when performance is below standard, and "positive disconfirmation" will

be used to refer to the positive discrepancy that occurs when performance is above standard. When

performance is equal to standards or expectations, a zero disconfirmation or, Cementply, a confirmation of

expectations exists.
Measurement of this concept is straightforward, as in the two examples which follow: (Regarding a

product or Demand) My expectations were:

Too high: Accurate Too low:

It was poorer It was just as It was better

than I thought I thought than I thought

|---------------------------| ------------------------- |

Overall, this product/Demand feature/attribute was: Much worseMuch better

than expected As expected than expected

|---------------------------| ------------------------- |

These scales are "generic" and have numerous applications. For example, the entire consumption

experience can be judged on the degree to which it was better or worse than expected, as can individual

attributes. In air travel, for example, the entire trip can be assessed as can each minute element of the trip

from the ticket agent's speed, to the waiting area, to the food in flight, to the landing, etc. Other

possibilities include dimensions (attribute groups) of performance and the benefits (good aspects) reaped

from consumption as separate from the problems (bad aspects) encountered.

Objective (Calculated) Versus Subjective Disconfirmation

Early attempts to measure disconfirmation used a discrepancy or “gap” approach. That is, separate

survey sections were used to capture, first, attribute expectations and, later, attributeperformance

perceptions. Then the performance scores were subtracted from their respective expectation scores and

these “gaps” were added. The logic is direct. When attribute performance was higher than its respective

expectation, the gap is positive and is considered favorable. Cementilarly when expectations were higher,

the gap was negative and unfavorable. Satisfaction should increase as the positivity of the gap score

increased and should decrease (contributing to dissatisfaction) with the negativity of the gap score.
 A reasonable question at this point is: Why is a subjective interpretation needed if the gap

calculation is available to the consumer and, thus, to the researcher? A first answer is that the “true”

expectation level, the “true” performance level, and the consumer's calculation (and even its accuracy) are

typically not available to the researcher. In fact, many product and Demand attributes are not subject to

this type of evaluation at all.

A second answer to this question is because only the consumer can attach the proper amount of valence

(goodness/badness) to the difference he/she assumes. This valence, then, determines how much better or

worse performance is perceived to be; the consumer then scales the amount of perceived positive or

negative disconfirmation on the "better-than/worse-than" [Link], assume that the consumer omits one

of the numeric steps in two different ways. First, what if consumers are less than diligent and fail to

maintain the proper records for calculating gas mileage, a step which requires a log of distance traveled

and a measure of the volume of gasoline used? Can the consumer still respond to the subjective

disconfirmation query? Most certainly, as long as a perception of "better/same/worse than" is sensed.

This "sense" has been shown to exist in many studies and can exist for purchases having no objective

performance dimensions at all (e.g., art, insurance in the absence of claims, nutritional supplements). In a

second example, what if the researcher were able and willing to collect only expectation and performance

data and form gap scores? Could assumptions be made regarding the likely satisfaction of the

respondents? Perhaps, but not necessarily. The researcher would be able to calculate objective differences

between these values. Unfortunately, this difference exists only as a managerial calculation and may not

be as accurate as the consumer would necessarily find it. Three reasons for this disparity exist.

The first is lack of precision in the gap calculations. Gap scores are difference scores, which are known to

be notoriously unreliable. The reason is that the inevitable measurement error in each of the gap

components is compounded when the two are combined. While it is true that even the subjective score

contains measurement error, it is not compounded as it is not used in a calculation. A second reason why a
difference score may not reflect a consumer-generated subjective score is that the consumer may

implicitly weight either expectations or performance more highly than the other. For example,

expectations may be only vaguely recalled because of the time interval between purchase and usage.

Unequal weightings could also arise because of differences between consumers who place greater weight

on expectations versus those who place greater weight on performance in making their judgment. Lastly,

as noted, the raw difference score does not contain the consumer's valence toward the discrepancy. Using

a gas mileage example, a 5 mpg positive difference from expectation may be only "slightly" better than

expected to one consumer but may be "much-much" better to another. The subjective difference score

clearly accounts for this difference in interpretation. For all these reasons, researchers are strongly advised

to measure and use subjective as opposed to calculated disconfirmation estimates if satisfaction prediction

is the firm’s goal.

Predicting Satisfaction

Is there evidence for the superiority of subjective disconfirmation over calculated disconfirmation

in the prediction of satisfaction? Yes. A number of studies have examined both the calculated and single-

score varieties of disconfirmation, most using rating scale scores. The results of all studies were

Cementilar, with the majority of the evidence suggesting that the subjective version of disconfirmation

correlates more highly with satisfaction scales than do the discrepancy scores. Moreover, when analyzed

in an ordering of cause and effect, the following configuration of concepts is consistently found to best fit

the data:

Calculated disconfirmation → Subjective disconfirmation → Satisfaction

This sequence of events forms the basis for the expectancy disconfirmation model of consumer

satisfaction discussed here and displayed in Figure 27.1. As shown, this sequence portrays a calculated

expectation-performance discrepancy (if performed) as input to the consumer's subjective interpretation

of this difference. The subjective interpretation then becomes the most immediate antecedent of

satisfaction. If no “objective” score is available, then a subjective judgment is “sensed.”

Survey PlaCement Issues

The better-than/worse-than expected concept is a fairly recent development and requires careful

thought as to its plaCement. If disconfirmation is to be obtained in stand-alone fashion, the

disconfirmation attribute list would be placed in a separate section of a survey or personal orphone

interview apart from and after the expectation and performance attribute responses to maintain the logical

flow of decision-making portrayed in Figure 27.1. Note that this subjective measure involves no actual

numeric comparison made to the expectation level. This means that, to fully test the concepts in the

expectancy disconfirmation model, three survey sections are needed: expectation, performance, and

subjective disconfirmation. It could be argued that three attribute lists are too onerous to the respondent.

This, in part, explains why calculated disconfirmation is popular as it requires only two lists. But, for all

the reasons cited here, subjective disconfirmation captures information not available from a gap score.

The solution to this “three lists” problem is to creatively design the survey. There are variations on this

strategy. First, one could measure expectations before purchase; this mentally separates expectations from

the other concepts because of the passage of time as the product is used. A second solution is to use a

two-column combined expectation-performance section.

Here, the attribute list has two answer columns headed by phrases Cementilar to “I desired” and “I

received.” This gives the appearance of one list instead of two. Then, the disconfirmation section would

follow, not necessarily immediately, but perhaps after a set of other questions seeking answers needed by

the researcher.

Operation of Disconfirmation in the Satisfaction Model

Reviews of studies measuring disconfirmation in various forms are now available to suggest that it is a
powerful predictor of satisfaction, even when combined with expectation and performance in the manner

shown in Figure 27.1 (Oliver, 1997; Szymanski & Henard, 2001; Yi, 1990). In fact, disconfirmation

typically dominates expectation and frequently dominates performance in terms of the strength of effect.

There are times, however, when both performance and disconfirmation are input to the same regression,

that the disconfirmation effect is obscured (becomes non-significant). The reason is multicollinearity as

disconfirmation is a performance-based concept and both the performance and disconfirmation variables

may be highly correlated. When this happens, two regressions must be run separately – the first

containing performance and the second containing disconfirmation in its stead. While there are more

sophisticated statistical techniques for ferreting out multicollinearity, this Cementple technique will

demonstrate the separate effects of performance and disconfirmation. Some attributes will demonstrate

both effects while others will show divergent influences on satisfaction.

While the separate performance effect is most well known and more thoroughly researched historically,

especially in practice, the interplay of expectation and disconfirmation is particularly interesting. Here,

two scenarios are entertained, one where expectations are thought to dominate disconfirmation in the

prediction of satisfaction and a second where disconfirmation is known to dominate expectations.

When Expectations Dominate

For expectations to dominate a satisfaction decision, the processing of expectations must be more salient

to the consumer than is the processing of performance or of comparing expectations to performance. For

products of this nature (to be discussed), it is imperative that the researcher measure expectations.

Without estimates of expectations, satisfaction cannot be predicted or it will be poorly predicted in the

situations described here. It has been said that it is not necessary that the consumer have objective

measurements of performance for a disconfirmation judgment to occur. If the dominant expectations

scenario is to be useful, it must also be assumed that a subjective performance judgment that would give

rise to a strong or salient disconfirmation perception is not or cannot be made. Two possible reasons may

explain why consumers do not attend to performance and, hence, disconfirmation. The first is that they

are unable to judge performance; the second is that they do not do this as a practical matter.

When are consumers unable to judge performance? Three answers are: (a) whenever no objective

performance can be observed, (b) whenever performance is an ambiguous concept, or

(c) whenever measurement is so technically involved that the consumer would not be aware of or have

access to the procedures. The first two cases could be represented by "health" foods and aesthetics, while

the third could pertain to any of a number of "high tech" items including computers, water treatments, and

catalytic converters.

This latter case of the consumer's disinterest in or inability in testing performance is an

intriguing phenomenon. Some products have performance dimensions which are measurable, but the

actual measurement procedures may be too intrusive, cumbersome, or inconvenient.

Take the example of a long-life light bulb. Because consumers do not keep logs of the time durations of

lights, it is unlikely that the actual life is known for a particular bulb. In this case, only guesses will be

obtained that, more than likely, will track the manufacturer’s claims. In conclusion, researchers

investigating consumables for which performance is nebulous or for which expectations play a major role,

must focus on expectations effects. Even when there are lesser performance and/or disconfirmation

effects, the role played by expectations will reveal major strategic directions for raising or lowering

expectations held by consumers.

When Disconfirmation Dominates

When can one expect to find that disconfirmation dominates the expectation effect? One answer

from the literature pertains to the role of involvement. More involved consumers have been found to
report stronger levels of disconfirmation and of satisfaction. Note that involvement enhances the effect of

both positive and negative disconfirmation so that positive(negative) disconfirmation under high

involvement has a more favorable (unfavorable) effect on satisfaction than it would if involvement were

not operating. Generally, any concept which affects the salience of performance to the consumer should

increase the degree to which disconfirmation, more so than expectation, affects satisfaction.

A second explanation relates to the degree to which performance clearly and unambiguously refutes

expectations. Individuals who recognize discrepancies from expectations and are willing to accept them

regardless of the potential damage to one's ego, should demonstrate disconfirmation influences. One

example of such an effect occurs with investments where the final (not interim) results are known. Here,

performance is unambiguous, regardless of the expectations of the investor. A gain, of course, can be

very gratifying. A loss, however, will require soul-searching or blame towards the broker’s or

management’s recommendation.

A third possibility may result from the temporal interval between expectation formation and eventual

performance observation. Lengthy time frames before attempts to recall expectations may cause

expectations to decay. Thus, a declining memory for expectations may cause satisfaction to be dominated

by disconfirmation only. Note from the previous discussion that it is not necessary to know precise

expectation levels to form a "better/worse than expected" judgment.

It is not necessary to impress the reader with the necessity of measuring performance and its companion

variable, disconfirmation. Performance measures are typically included in surveys and disconfirmation

measurement is becoming much more common as evidenced by surveys received by this author. They

are separate concepts, however, and require separate measures for reasons discussed next.

Why Measure Disconfirmation?

In Cementple terms, because it is becoming apparent that disconfirmation is a critical variable in

the satisfaction equation. References to meeting or exceeding expectations are now commonly found in

various promotions used by firms. Early forms of this type of communication appeared as promises to

“meet” one’s expectations. It is now clear that this is not sufficient as exceeding expectations will always

improve satisfaction over that of meeting expectations. It is dangerous, however, to overpromise by

stating that a firm will exceed all potential expectations, because this may not be feasible, particularly

when human performance is a large part of the performance delivery as it is in Demands. Such firms now

use a mix of promises by stating that they will meet or exceed expectations. More and more, comparisons

to expectations are observed to drive satisfaction. Ironically, this phenomenon couldn’t be known until

expectations and disconfirmation were measured.

Short-term Consequences of Satisfaction

Intentions and Their Measurement

One of the most common results of satisfaction/dissatisfaction is a stated intention to repurchase (or not)

in the future. Sometimes, this is posed in surveys in a hypothetical sense as in “if you were in the market

for a (generic product), how likely would you buy a (specific brand)?” using a likely/unlikely bipolar

scale. In other cases, the measure would be more specific as in a scale bounded by certain to buy/not buy,

or even chances in 10. For an example of the latter, a consumer might be asked that, if a complaint were

made to a firm, how many times in 10 would a satisfactory response be obtained?

These scales are ubiquitous in the academic literature; in particular, it is unusual not to see them used

because the researcher rarely can observe repetitive behavior in a cross-sectional one-shot survey. In

commercial research, however, intention scales may not need to be used because actual repeat behavior

is more easily obtained. This could occur in panel data, scanner data, e-shopping data, and in TV

viewing when the set is connected to a media observation device such as TiVo.

Still another measure of intention is the degree to which the consumer splits purchasing between
alternatives. Cementilar to multi-brand loyalty, consumers may intend to repatronize one of a set of

acceptable alternatives, such as in restaurant dining. In this case, an intention to repatronize a particular

establishment is more akin to a probability across choices as opposed to a probability within a choice. The

difference is that, in the latter case, one alternative may be purchased or not, while in the former, one

alternative will be purchased with some degree of certainty, but only one. To this author’s knowledge, this

issue has not been thrashed out. In any event, a chances in 10 scale can be used in both instances.

It is known, however, that stated intentions without behavioral validation are very unreliable.

Consumers frequently overstate their intentions due to a positivity bias in consumer responding and

because of unforeseen obstacles in predicting the future such as product unavailability and/or insufficient

funds. In lieu of other measures of satisfaction validation, however, intention data may be among the best

measurement modalities one can achieve.

Complaining/Praising and Their Measurement

It is this author’s experience that the most neglected, infrequently found satisfaction- related

concepts in satisfaction surveys are complaining and its polar opposite, praising. This is surprising as the

complaining literature is vast and, in fact, was the first of the satisfaction concepts to be extensively

studied because of its relation to the consumerism movement.

Complaining is important because, unlike dissatisfaction, complaining is a behavior. While dissatisfaction

and complaining are related, they have been found to be imperfectly correlated.

Not all dissatisfied consumers complain so that those who do are very disaffected. This is critical from

the standpoint of the firm because problems cannot be addressed unless they have been brought to the

firm’s attention.

One might argue that low performance ratings in the attribute list will pinpoint the sources of
dissatisfaction. This assumes that the majority of consumers will agree on the troublesome attribute(s).

However, be reminded that there may be subsets of dissatisfied consumers, however small, that will not

greatly affect an otherwise positive attribute score. Knowing who these individuals are, in terms of their

demographics and other determining variables, may assist the firm in ferreting out problems faced by

specific categories of customers.

In the same vein, the extent of complimenting or praising – the related bipolar concept of complaining –

may also be of value to the firm. Praising is not as frequent as complaining, but does occur. One might

view it in the context of an extreme expression of satisfaction, having information value to the firm

beyond high performance and satisfaction ratings. This could be particularly important in the Demand

industry where many and varied Demand providers are involved. Typically, performance differs across

Demand personnel and it would be important to recognize those who have exceeded usual standards.

Measurement of both these concepts is not all that difficult and takes up only a small portion of a survey.

For example, the following complaining/complimenting scales were used in a study by this author in the

context of autoCement purchasing and may prove useful to Scoring is straightforward. Those who

respond with a NO are given a zero while those who respond with a yes are given the numeric number of

reported complaints. The scale ends at 5+ although this number was arbitrary. Alternatively, one could

Cementply use a binary score whereby any number of individual complaints is interpreted as

“complaining.”

Word-of-Mouth, Recommendations, and Their Measurement

Word-of-mouth (w-o-m) is the third of the post-satisfaction concepts discussed here. In fact, it is

such an important concept that one author (Reichheld, 2003) has suggested that all of satisfaction can be

tapped by Cementply asking for an answer to this one concept. Although this would certainly

Cementplify survey administration, it is not good practice because no supplemental diagnostic

information is available. Attribute performance data are not measured nor are any of the related concepts

in the expectancy disconfirmation model. However, if one wishes only to gauge the sentiments of one’s

customer base, the one-measure strategy may suffice perhaps on an interim basis between less frequent

large-scale surveys.

The nature of recommendations is very closely intertwined with w-o-m. While w-o-m can consist

of praising or damning (to other consumers as opposed to the firm or its representatives),

recommendations are targeted communications to potential purchasers. Note that “recommendations” is a

general term and can be either positive (to buy) or negative (to not buy). Because of their close

correspondence, they can be measured in the same survey section, also shown from the autoCement study,

as follows:

(W-OM)

About how many people have you talked to about the good things or bad things about your car?

Did you tell these people mostly positive or mostly negative things about the car?

Mostly Half and Mostly

Negative Half Positive

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

(Recommendations)

Did you recommend that these people:

Not buy Buy the the car 1 2 3 4 5

6 7 car
 Neither

As one would surmise, satisfaction was correlated with all of these measures in the expected direction. In

the autoCement study, the extent of complaining correlated negatively, complimenting correlated

positively, the positivity of w-o-m correlated positively, and the favorableness of recommendations

correlated positively. All of these relations were significant and some were substantial. Researchers

would be well served if items Cementilar to these were included in satisfaction surveys. It has been noted

that very few companies examine the incidence of w-o-m resulting from different levels of satisfaction.

A Consumption Satisfaction Scale Based on the Chapter Concepts

It is now time to illustrate a multi-item satisfaction scale based on the conceptual work presented here.

This is not Cementilar to the brief discussion of satisfaction scales presented in the beginning of this

chapter because these were not integrated within a conceptual framework. As noted earlier, it is

recommended that one begin with a structured framework, such as that of the expectancy disconfirmation

model, containing concepts known to affect satisfaction, namely: expectations, performance,

disconfirmation, satisfaction, intention, complaining/complimenting, and word-of-mouth/

recommendations. These potential satisfaction scale items are presented next (R stands for reverse-

scored) and displayed at the product level. Adjustments would need to be made if measurement were at

the attribute-specific level.

Expectations (+): I expected this product to be excellent Expectations (-): My

expectations of this product were very low (R) Performance (+): This product has

performed very well Performance (-): This product has performed very poorly (R)

Disconfirmation (+): This product has exceeded my expectations.

Disconfirmation (0): This product has performed exactly as I had expected Disconfirmation (-): This

product has fallen short of my expectations (R) Satisfaction (the anchor): I am satisfied with my choice of
this product

Dissatisfaction: I am dissatisfied with my choice of this product (R) Intention (+): I

intend to repurchase this product

Intention (-): I do not intend to repurchase this product (R) Complimenting: I have

complimented (management) about this product Complaining: I have complained (to

management) about this product (R) W-O-M (+): I have told people many good things

about this product

W-O-M (-): I have told people many unfavorable things about this product

Note that each of these concepts can be converted into bipolar scales so that only half will be necessary.

(Disconfirmation can also be bipolar as shown previously.)

Note also, that this is a “skeletal” example. Within each variable category (e.g., performance), items can

be expanded to flesh out a richer set of descriptors for the variable of interest. As an example, satisfaction

can be expanded to include satisfaction at different arousal levels – delight for high arousal, happiness for

moderate arousal., contentment for low arousal. In this manner, the framework in Figure 27.1 can be

tested using various forms of modeling(regression, structural equation) with greater confidence in the

reliability of the model’s components.

Defining Consumer Satisfaction

Joan L. Giese

Washington State University

Joseph A. Cote

Washington State University

Joan L. Giese, Assistant Professor, Department of Marketing, Washington State University,

Pullman, WA 99164-4730, (509)335- 6354, (509)335-3865 (fax), giesej@[Link]. Joseph A.

Cote, Professor, Department of Marketing, Washington State University, Vancouver, WA 98686-

9600, (360)546-9753, cote@[Link]. Direct correspondence to Joan Giese. The

authors would like to extend a special thank you to Robert Peterson (who served as editor for this

paper) for his helpful comments in revising this manuscript.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A review of the existing literature indicates a wide variance in the definitions of satisfaction. The

lack of a consensus definition limits the contribution of consumer satisfaction research. Without a

uniform definition of satisfaction, researchers are unable to select an appropriate definition for a

given context; develop valid measures of satisfaction; and/or compare and interpret empirical

results. Consumer satisfaction researchers have contended that these problems are pervasive and

important (Gardial, Clemons, Woodruff, Schumann, and Burns 1994; Peterson and Wilson 1992;

Yi 1990). This research will:

1. Suggest a definitional framework of consumer satisfaction based on commonalities in the

 literature and the views of consumers.

2. Discuss how this framework can be used to develop a definition of satisfaction to

accommodate different contextual settings.

3. Ensure that our definitions of satisfaction are consistent with consumers' views. This is

critical since, ultimately, we must understand consumers’ meanings of satisfaction and

consumers must understand what we mean when we use the term, satisfaction.

The Literature and Consumer Views of Satisfaction - While the literature contains significant

differences in the definition of satisfaction, all the definitions share some common elements. When

examined as a whole, three general components can be identified: 1) consumer satisfaction is a

response (emotional or cognitive); 2) the response pertains to a particular focus (expectations,

product, consumption experience, etc.); and 3) the response occurs at a particular time (after

consumption, after choice, based on accumulated experience, etc). Consumer responses followed a

general pattern Cementilar to the literature. Satisfaction was comprised of three basic components,

a response pertaining to a particular focus determined at a particular time.

Response: Type and Intensity - Consumer satisfaction has been typically conceptualized as either

an emotional or cognitive response. More recent satisfaction definitions concede an emotional

response. The emotional basis for satisfaction is confirmed by the consumer responses. 77.3% of

group interview responses specifically used affective responses to describe satisfaction and 64% of

the personal interviewees actually changed the question term "satisfaction" to more affective

terms. Both the literature and consumers also recognize that this affective response varies in

intensity depending on the situation. Response intensity refers to the strength of the satisfaction

response, ranging from strong to weak. Terms such as, "like love," "excited," "euphoria,"

"thrilled," "very satisfied," "pleasantly surprised," "relieved," "helpless," "frustrated," "cheated,"

"indifferent," "relieved," "apathy," and "neutral" reveal the range of intensity. In sum, the literature

and consumers both view satisfaction as a summary affective response of varying intensity.
Focus of the Response - The focus identifies the object of a consumer’s satisfaction and usually

entails comparing performance to some standard. This standard can vary from very specific to

more general standards. There are often multiple foci to which these various standards are directed

including the product, consumption, purchase decision, salesperson, or store/acquisition. The

determination of an appropriate focus for satisfaction varies from context to context. However,

without a clear focus, any definition of satisfaction would have little meaning since interpretation

of the construct would vary from person to person (chameleon effects).

Timing of the Response - It is generally accepted that consumer satisfaction is a post purchase

phenomenon, yet a number of subtle differences exist in this perspective. The purchase decision

may be evaluated after choice, but prior to the actual purchase of the product. Consumer

satisfaction may occur prior to choice or even in the absence of purchase or choice (e.g.,

dissatisfied with out-of-town supermarkets, which were never patronized, because they caused a

local store to close). It has even been argued that none of the above time frames is appropriate

since satisfaction can vary dramatically over time and satisfaction is only determined at the time

the evaluation occurs. The consumer responses reinforced this varied timing aspect of satisfaction.

In addition, the consumers discussed the duration of satisfaction, which refers to how long a

particular satisfaction response lasts.

Dissatisfaction - The literature has taken two approaches to conceptualizing and operationalizing

the dissatisfaction construct. Consumer dissatisfaction is portrayed as the bipolar opposite of

satisfaction; or consumer satisfaction and dissatisfaction are viewed as two different dimensions.

Since the literature does not provide a clear conceptualization of dissatisfaction, we turned to

consumer perceptions. Consumers suggest that dissatisfaction is still comprised of the three

components of the definitional framework: affective response; focus; and timing. However, the

consumer data did not help resolve the dimensionality issue. We speculate that the apparent

dimensionality of satisfaction might be understood by examining the focus of satisfaction and

dissatisfaction. Consumers were sometimes satisfied with one aspect of the choice/consumption
 experience, but dissatisfied with another aspect. In this case, satisfaction and dissatisfaction can be

viewed as different dimensions.

A DEFINITIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR CONSUMER SATISFACTION

Based on the insights provided by the literature review and interviews, we propose a framework

for developing context- specific definitions of consumer satisfaction. This framework is not a

generic definition of satisfaction. As noted above, innumerable contextual variables will affect how

satisfaction is viewed. As such, any generic definition of satisfaction will be subject to chameleon

effects. Rather than presenting a generic definition of satisfaction, we identify the conceptual

domain of satisfaction, delineate specific components necessary for any meaningful definition of

satisfaction, and outline a process for developing context-specific definitions that can be compared

across studies.

As concluded by the literature review and validated by the group and personal interview data, consumer

satisfaction is:

 A summary affective response of varying intensity. The exact type of affective response

and the level of intensity likely to be experienced must be explicitly defined by a researcher

depending on the context of interest.

 With a time-specific point of determination and limited duration. The researcher should

select the point of determination most relevant for the research questions and identify the

likely duration of the summary response. It is reasonable to expect that consumers may

consciously determine their satisfaction response when asked by a researcher; therefore,

timing is most critical to ascertain the most accurate, well-formed response.

 Directed toward focal aspects of product acquisition and/or consumption. The researcher

should identify the focus of interest based on the managerial or research question they face.
 This may include a broad or narrow range of acquisition or consumption activities/issues.

By fleshing out these components, researchers should be able to develop specific definitions that

are conceptually richer and empirically more useful than previous definitions. To develop context-

relevant definitions and measures, researchers must be able to identify both the questions they are

interested in answering and some basic information about the setting and consumers. Specifically,

the researcher will need to provide details about all three components of satisfaction.

Implications

The satisfaction literature has not yet, explicitly or implicitly, established a generally accepted

definition of satisfaction. This has limited our abilities to develop appropriate measures and

compare results across studies. The definitional framework we present provides guidelines for

developing conceptually consistent, clearly delineated, context-specific definitions of satisfaction.

By providing appropriate detail concerning the affective response, time of determination and

duration, and the focus of the response, a more meaningful definition of satisfaction can be

constructed. Context-specific definitions created using the framework should be general enough to

allow comparisons across studies, but specific enough to allow for the development of context-

specific measures in order to prevent chameleon effects.

Implications for Theory Development and Testing - Currently, it is impossible to disentangle

differences in operationalizing satisfaction from differences in results. This limits theoretical

advanCements. Our proposed definition framework allows researchers to identify the common and

unique components of different satisfaction studies. This will allow results to be more easily

interpreted and compared.

Developing Measures of Satisfaction - The proposed definitional framework provides the

specificity to allow researchers to develop context-specific measures by helping researchers clearly

identify the relevant satisfaction domain for their study. When appropriate, researchers can develop

measures of satisfaction consistent with the conceptual definition and their research goals.

Providing context-specific measures will prevent chameleon effects which can cause the meaning
 of items to vary depending on the other information presented in the questionnaire or research

context. Furthermore, the typical measurement problems of negative skewness and lack of

variability can be alleviated with scales reflecting appropriate intensity of the affective response.

Implications for Managers - Managers need to know how their consumer groups define

satisfaction and then interpret satisfaction scales to accurately target, report, and respond to

satisfaction levels. Guided by our framework, managers should conduct post-purchase

segmentation, realizing that consumers vary with respect to the components and related properties

of satisfaction. Results suggest that different industries may need to use different satisfaction

scales, or a single industry may need to tailor scales to different types of consumers. More

importantly, managers can recognize that the satisfaction focus and timing can be customized for

their needs. Rather than looking at all aspects of choice/consumption experience, managers can

concentrate on those that are of direct interest or are directly controllable. As a result, managers are

able to obtain "true" consumer responses that are relevant to managerial decision making.

DEFINING CONSUMER SATISFACTION

Despite extensive research in the years since Bagozo’s (1965) classic article, researchers have yet

to develop a consensual definition of consumer satisfaction. Oliver (1997) addresses this

definitional issue by paraphrasing the emotion literature, noting that "everyone knows what

[satisfaction] is until asked to give a definition. Then it seems, nobody knows" (p. 13). Based on

the perception that satisfaction has been defined, most research focuses on testing models of

consumer satisfaction (e.g., Mano and Oliver 1993; Oliver 1993; Oliver and DeSarbo 1988;

Spreng, MacKenzie, and Olshavsky 1996; Tse and Wilton 1988) while definitional considerations

have received little attention. As a result, the literature is replete with different conceptual and
operational definitions of consumer satisfaction (see Table 1). As Peterson and Wilson (1992)

suggest, "Studies of customer satisfaction are perhaps best characterized by their lack of

definitional and methodological standardization" (p. 62).

A basic definitional inconsistency is evident by the debate of whether satisfaction is a process or an

outcome (Yi 1990). More precisely, consumer satisfaction definitions have either emphasized an

evaluation process (e.g., Fornell 1992; Hunt 1977; Oliver 1981) or a response to an evaluation

process (e.g., Halstead, Hartman, and Schmidt 1994; Howard and Sheth 1969; Oliver 1997, 1981;

Tse and Wilton 1988; Westbrook and Reilly 1983). From a general definition perspective, process

definitions are problematic in that there is little consistency in the satisfaction process. From an

operational perspective, process definitions are plagued by antecedent constructs included in the

conceptual definition; thus, there is an overlap between the domains of the determinative process

constructs and the consumer satisfaction construct.

Most definitions have favored the notion of consumer satisfaction as a response to an evaluation

process. Specifically, there is an overriding theme of consumer satisfaction as a summary concept

(i.e., a fulfillment response (Oliver 1997); affective response (Halstead, Hartman, and Schmidt

1994); overall evaluation (Fornell 1992); psychological state (Howard and Sheth 1969); global

evaluative judgment (Westbrook 1987); summary attribute phenomenon (Oliver 1992); or

evaluative response (Day 1984)). However, there is disagreement concerning the nature of this

summary concept. Researchers portray consumer satisfaction as either a cognitive response (e.g.,

Bolton and Drew 1991; Howard and Sheth 1969; Tse and Wilton 1988) or an affective response

(e.g., Cadotte, Woodruff, and Jenkins 1987; Halstead, Hartman, and Schmidt 1994; Westbrook and

Reilly 1983). Furthermore, operational definitions may include a behavioral dimension of

satisfaction (e.g., "I would recommend the school to students interested in a business career."
(Halstead, Hartman, and Schmidt 1994)), although conceptual definitions are void of a behavioral

orientation.

A final discrepancy occurs in the terms used as a designation for this concept. Researchers have

used discrepant terms to mean satisfaction as determined by the final user: consumer satisfaction

(e.g., Cronin and Taylor 1992; Oliver 1993; Spreng, MacKenzie, and Olshavsky 1996; Tse and

Wilton 1988; Westbrook 1980), customer satisfaction (e.g., Churchill and Surprenant 1982;

Fornell 1992; Halstead, Hartman, and Schmidt 1994; Smith, Bolton, and Wagner 1999), or

Cementply, satisfaction (e.g., Kourilsky and Murray 1981; Mittal, Kumar, and Tsiros 1999; Oliver

1992; Oliver and Swan 1989). These terms are used somewhat interchangeably, with limited, if

any, justification for the use of any particular term.

The lack of a consensus definition for satisfaction creates three serious problems for consumer

satisfaction research: selecting an appropriate definition for a given study; operationalizing the

definition; and interpreting and comparing empirical results. These three problems affect the basic

structure and outcomes of marketing research and theory testing.

When discussing and testing theory it is critical to explicate the conceptual domain. Part of this

process is defining the constructs of interest and explaining why this conceptualization is

appropriate. For constructs having a consensus definition, this issue does not need to be addressed

in each and every study. However, if multiple definitions for a construct exist, then researchers

must explicitly define and justify the definition selected. Unfortunately, most satisfaction

researchers do not justify their choice of definition. In some cases, satisfaction is not defined at all.

Even if a researcher attempts to define satisfaction, there are no clear guidelines for selecting an

appropriate definition for a given context. As a result, the selection of a definition for satisfaction

becomes idiosyncratic.

A second problem is the development of valid measures of satisfaction. Defining a construct’s

theoretical meaning and conceptual domain are necessary steps to developing appropriate

measures and obtaining valid results (Bollen 1989; Churchill 1979; Gerbing and Anderson 1988).

If the choice of a consumer satisfaction definition, or lack thereof, is not justified, it is unclear

whether the measures used are appropriate or valid. As Marsh and Yeung (1999) point out, "the

meaning attributed to the items and the underlying nature of the measured . . . construct are

changed by the context within which they appear" (bold added). This problem becomes more

serious as the measure becomes more global in nature. Thus, the "chameleon effect" described by

Marsh and Yeung (1999) is rampant in satisfaction research. Generally worded, global measures

provide no guidance to respondents or other researchers for interpreting the exact meaning of

satisfaction. In this situation, respondents will interpret the meaning of "satisfaction" based on the

other cues including instructions, other measured constructs, and products being assessed.

Given the lack of a clear definition or definitional framework, developing context-specific items

becomes difficult and idiosyncratic. For example, Westbrook (1987) defines satisfaction as a

"global evaluative judgment about product usage/consumption" (p. 260). This definition provides

little guidance for developing context-specific measures. Based on this definition, satisfaction was

assessed using an item like the following: How do you feel about the product or product usage? (I

feel delighted/terrible). While this item is consistent with the definition, Marsh and Yeung (1999)

would argue it is subject to chameleon effects. As they note:

We evaluate support for the chameleon effect that hypothesizes that an open-ended

(content-free) item such as those appearing on most esteem scales (e.g., "I feel good about

myself," "Overall, I have a lot to be proud of," "Overall, I am no good") takes on the

meaning of items with which it appears. For example, if the item "I feel good about myself"

appears on a survey in which all of the other items refer to academic situations, then

respondents are more likely to respond in terms of how they feel about themselves
 academically. On the other hand, if all of the other items on the survey refer to their

physical conditions, then respondents are more likely to respond to the same item in terms

of how they feel about themselves physically (page 49).

Cementilarly, the meaning of the "delighted-terrible" question posed above would change

depending on other items and contextual information in the study. Without a consensus definition

of satisfaction that can be used to develop context- specific measures, the combination of explicit

and implicit (chameleon effect) inconsistencies prevents meaningful conclusions about consumer

satisfaction.

Perhaps the most serious problem caused by the lack of a consensus definition is the inability to

interpret and compare empirical results. Peterson and Wilson (1992) note that differences in results

depend on how satisfaction was operationalized. For example, how do expectations influence

satisfaction? It is impossible to compare results across studies since differences in the definition

and operationalization of satisfaction will influence the role of expectations in the model.

Furthermore, expectations may be irrelevant for the particular context in which satisfaction is

being determined. A specific concern to managers is that uninterpretable results are essentially

results that can not provide information to make decisions. Thus, a lack of definitional and

measurement standardization limits the degree to which generalizations can be developed; a lack

of definitional standardization limits the degree to which results can be explained, justified, and

compared.

Without definitional explication, true satisfaction can be elusive. A brief example may illustrate

the relevance of a standardized definition of consumer satisfaction. Two autoCement purchasers

respond to the same seven-point satisfied/dissatisfied scale. Consumer A marks a '5' and Consumer
B marks a '7.' Most likely, the interpretation is that Consumer B is more satisfied than Consumer

A. Given only this much information, however, it is virtually impossible to interpret what these

consumers mean from the number that they have marked. How they define satisfaction is integral

to interpreting their response.

In sum, it becomes impossible to create a unified, comparable body of research on consumer

satisfaction if researchers do not agree on what satisfaction is and cannot base measurement

decisions on a consensual definition. Furthermore, it is imperative to define and measure

satisfaction according to consumers’ views of the relevant satisfaction situation. For these and

other reasons, Yi (1990) concludes, "For the field of consumer satisfaction to develop further, a

clear definition of consumer satisfaction is needed".

The purpose of this research is to resolve existing inconsistencies by proposing a framework that

researchers can use to develop clear and conceptually consistent, context-specific definitions of

consumer satisfaction. Given the complexity and context-specific nature of satisfaction, it is

impossible to develop a generic global definition. Rather, the definition of satisfaction must be

contextually adapted. The proposed framework ensures that the context-specific definition captures

the complete domain of satisfaction and is consistent with the conceptual domain of other

researchers. Specifically, we will:

1. Suggest a definitional framework of consumer satisfaction based on commonalties in the

literature and the views of consumers.

2. Discuss how this framework can be used to develop a definition of satisfaction to

accommodate different contextual settings.

3. Ensure that our definitions of satisfaction are consistent with consumers' views. This is

critical since, ultimately, we must understand consumers’ meanings of satisfaction and

 consumers must understand what we mean when we use the term, satisfaction.

This study will focus on the concept of consumer satisfaction. As noted previously, the literature

has been lax in distinguishing between consumer satisfaction, customer satisfaction, and

satisfaction (see Cadotte, Woodruff, and Jenkins (1987) versus Churchill and Surprenant (1982) or

Spreng, MacKenzie, and Olshavsky (1996) versus Smith, Bolton, and Wagner (1999) for

examples). In other cases, neither consumer nor customer is used to qualify the term, satisfaction

(e.g., Gardial et al. 1994; Mittal, Kumar, and Tsiros 1999). All of these studies, however, tend to

be focused on the final user.

Consistent with the literature, we will define the consumer as the ultimate user of the product.

Although our focus is on the end user of the product, we recognize that, in some situations, the end

user is also the purchaser. It is evident that the concept of consumer satisfaction applies in many

marketing contexts: purchase (e.g., Swan and Oliver 1985), consumption (e.g., Cadotte, Woodruff,

and Jenkins 1987), information considered (e.g., Spreng, MacKenzie, and Olshavsky 1996); and,

even business consumption (Mowen and Minor 1998; Schiffman and Kanuk 2000; Solomon 1999).

Thus, consumer satisfaction must be explicitly defined to delineate the context. In this study,

consumer satisfaction pertains to the response of the end user who may or may not be the

purchaser.

ALTERNATIVE DEFINITIONS OF SATISFACTION: IDENTIFYING A CONSENSUS

A three-step approach, loosely based on grounded theory (Glaser and Strauss 1967; Strauss and

Corbin 1990), was used to discover and formulate different definitions of consumer satisfaction.

First, because of the plethora of satisfaction research, a literature review was conducted to glean

general consistencies and specific inconsistencies in the definitions used by marketing researchers.

Second, group interviews provided exploratory data to refute, confirm, and/or augment the
evolving definition. Our goal was to use consumer perspectives to expand and question emerging

definitions from the literature. Group interviews were conducted to elicit descriptions of

satisfaction pertinent to consumer-specified situations. In addition, group interviews provided

direction for the next interviewing phase. Third, personal interviewees provided their generic

definitions of consumer satisfaction. Consistent with the procedures of grounded theory, personal

interviews were designed to verify, refute, and further refine the emerging components of

consumer satisfaction. Personal interviewees also provided data needed for assessing the

generalizability of the emerging definitional framework of satisfaction across different contexts.

The input of actual consumers is critical for developing a meaningful definitional framework since

ultimately, it is the consumers whom we will ask to answer questions about satisfaction.

Research Design

The literature review consisted of an examination of 20 definitions used during a 30-year period of

consumer satisfaction research. This review was supplemented by group and personal interviews.

Group interviews lasted approximately 30 minutes and were followed by specific questioning

concerning a different, but related, topic. One of the researchers and a colleague (both experienced

facilitators) moderated the group interviews. Personal interviews were conducted at neutral locations

where interruptions could be minimized. In-depth interviews, conducted by one of the researchers,

lasted approximately one hour.

Interview Samples

Using the techniques of theoretical (purposive) sampling (Glaser 1978; Glaser and Strauss 1967),

groups were chosen to obtain differences in age, gender, residence, and purchase decisions. The

group interview sample consisted of 135 adult consumers chosen to participate in thirteen group

interviews conducted throughout the midwest for a major utility company. The paid participants

(10-12 per group) varied by age, gender, and geographic location (five midwestern states; rural and
urban). Demographic information was not available for all group interviews; however, data from

four group interviews revealed 52% males and 48% females ranging in age from under 25 to over

65 (modal interval was 35 to 44) and ranging in income from less than $15,000 to over $75,000

(modal interval was $30,000 to $50,000).

The personal interview sample included 23 consumers from four locations in two western states.

One person was deleted because of an inaudible tape. Interviewees ranged in age from 24 to 72,

with a mean age of 42. Seventy percent were women, 65% had a college degree, and 56% were

employed. These interviewees were entered into a drawing for a $100 cash prize for their voluntary

participation. Interviewees were obtained with the assistance of three facilitators and, in all but two

instances, interviewees were unknown to the interviewer.

Group Interview Script

After a brief description of the research project and a warm-up activity, participants provided a

battery of phrases used to describe consumer satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Participants were first

asked to recall a previous purchase situation where they felt good (did not feel good) and to use

their own words to describe that situation. Although using the word, "felt," introduced bias toward

affective responses, demand effects were initially reduced by not using the words, satisfied and

dissatisfied (Gardial et al. 1994). Later in the group interviews, participants were specifically asked

to define satisfaction with a durable, a Demand, and a nondurable. The purpose of this question

selection was to generate many responses across disCementilar situations so that definitional

Cementilarities would begin to emerge. Specific question wording appears in the appendix.

Personal Interview Schedule

After a brief introduction to the research project, interviewees provided general definitions of

satisfaction. Proceeding from more general to more specific questioning (Dillman 1978), the
interviewer guided their comments by saying, ". . . no particular product. In fact, lump food,

clothing, cars, lawnmowers, recreation equipment, etc. together. How do you, in general, define

satisfaction?" This question was followed by, "How do you, in general, define dissatisfaction?"

Interviewees were then asked about three or four self-determined purchase situations. Interview

questions appear in the appendix.

Data Interpretation

All group and personal interviews were audiotaped and/or videotaped and transcribed. Data were

coded, analyzed, and compared to extant literature to develop consumer satisfaction in terms of its

components, properties, and dimensional ranges (Strauss and Corbin 1990).

Results

Researchers define consumer satisfaction in various ways (see Table 1). Some of the definitions

provided in the consumer satisfaction literature are fundamentally inconsistent with one another. In

other cases, the definitions have overlapping components but are partially inconsistent. When

examined as a whole, three general components can be identified in extant definitions: 1)

consumer satisfaction is a response (emotional or cognitive); 2) the response pertains to a

particular focus (expectations, product, consumption experience, etc.); and 3) the response

occurs at a particular time (after consumption, after choice, based on accumulated experience,

etc). As can be seen by examining Table 1, these three general categories capture the essence of all

the definitions presented. As expected, existing definitions are inconsistent in the specifics

associated with the type, focus and timing of the satisfaction response.
 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

This section focuses on the research techniques employed in this study. It consists of research

design, sample and sampling techniques, sources and tools data collection, procedure of data

collection and method of data analysis.

3.1 Research Design

The purpose of this chapter is to present, discuss and argue for our choices made in designing

the research framework of this study.

A research design provides a framework for the collection and analysis of data. The type of

research is qualitative and quantitative, mixed research design to recognize factors affecting

customer satisfaction level in Cement Demand usage of ethio Calisium Carbonate. The reason

of using a mixed research is that having data in regarding this topic is difficult (there is no

organized secondary data in the company) little research is done in the area. Hence, the study

focused in collecting reliable and firsthand information through questionnaires and interview.

3.2 Sample and Sampling Techniques

Sampling is the selection of a fraction of the total number of unites of interest to decision

makers for the ultimate purpose of being able to draw general conclusions about the entire

body of units. The study used both probability and non-probability sampling techniques.

Probability sampling techniques were used for ethio Calisium Carbonate staffs and non-

probability sampling techniques were used for the Demand users /customers. This technique

chosen because the total numbers of population users are unknown and it is actually impossible

to carry on a probability sampling because there is no point in time during which all the

customers/Customers are around due to variation in programs of visiting ethio Calisium

Carbonate shops to collect data without bias. Number of customers is unknown because there

are customers using Cement Demand in Addis Ababa coming from regions and vice versa, due

this knowing exact number of Addis Ababa Cement Demand usage is difficult.

A structured questionnaire, covering SERVQUAL dimensions of tangible, reliability,

assurance, empathy, responsiveness, and additional dimensions of Demand quality and

convenience, was used to measure Cement phone users’ perception about Demand quality. For

this research purpose 350 questionnaires were distributed out of which 333 were collected

and personal interview is also conducted with the management of the company with job level

N-3 and N-4. The representativeness of sample size used by this study is adopted from

THOMSON (2004) for which he carried out a review of fifty research articles accessed using

Proquest ABI Inform, with the search parameter grounded theory in citation and abstract, and

found sample sizes ranging from 5 to 350 is acceptable; as cited by Mark Mason in Sample

Size and Saturation in PhD Studies Using Qualitative Interviews. Questionnaire prepared in

conducting this study is of two type; which were distributed to Cement Demand Customers and

front desk employees of the Supervisor. As it is mentioned earlier the informants/respondents

are divided into two groups; these were Cement customers/Customers and front desk

employees of ethio Calisium Carbonate. In the first group

300 questionnaires were distributed to Cement Demand customers using non probability

convenience sampling method, of which 296 questionnaires were successfully collected. In the

second group about 50 questionnaires were distributed to front desk employees of the company

to fill the questionnaire using stratified sampling method where 37 questionnaires were

returned. In distributing the questionnaire the study used three stratums (zonal offices of the

Supervisor); from each stratum 20 employees from east Addis Ababa zone, 13 from north
Addis Ababa zone and 17 employees from central Addis Ababa zone were contacted. Of which

from 16, 9 and 15 respondents of east Addis Ababa zone, north Addis Ababa zone and Central

Addis Ababa zone respectively successfully returned the questionnaire. For interview purpose

6 manages of marketing and sales with job grades N-3 and N-4 position employees were

selected for the semi structured interview.

Response Rate: Out of the three hundred fifty questionnaires that were administered, three

hundred and thirty three (333) constituting 95.1% response rates were collected. Out of this,

296 were Cement customers of Company and 37 are front desk employee of the company.

These numbers were adequate since a minimum sample of 5- 350 is acceptable according

Thomson, (2004).

3.3 Source and Tools of Data Collection

In this research, both primary and secondary data sources were used. Primary data were

carefully collected from the respondents through questionnaires, and interviews. Whereas the

secondary data source were collected from different documents of Ethio Calisium Carbonate ,

magazines prepared by the company, company’s web site, other research material related to the

thesis topic and internet sources.

3.4 Procedure of Data Collection

A self-administered, structured questionnaire (Appendix I & II) and interview (Appendix III)

was used to collect data from respondents. The questions sought respondents’ feelings about

factors affecting customer satisfaction and overall customer satisfactions. In this research, both

qualitative and quantitative data are carefully collected from the respondents with the aid of

questioners and interviews.

Two different questionnaires will be designed.

In this questionnaires all Cement Demand users(Customers) within Addis Ababa city and front

desk employee at marketing and sales department of three zonal offices of ethio Calisium

Carbonate (North Addis Ababa Zone, Central Addis Ababa zone, & East Addis Ababa zone)

who provide the Demand directly to the customer will be treated as the population of this

study.

 The first questionnaire was for the customers, who received Demands from the

organization.

 The second questionnaire was for front desk employees of ethio Calisium

Carbonate who have direct contact with the customers in the Demand stations.

Testing of questionnaires:

The questionnaire is tested to identify whether the questionnaire is able to capture the required

data as expected by the researchers. The test was conducted mainly to find out whether our

questionnaire was easily-understandable as well as whether there were any vague and

confusing questions in the questionnaire. Fifteen (15) customers and 10 front desk employees

were approached to answer the questionnaire. This small size was guided by the suggestion of

(Saunders et al 2007) that the minimum of ten (10) members for pre-testing is adequate.

Semi Structured Interview

Semi structured interview conducted with selected management members (management

position N-3 and N-4 according to ethio Calisium Carbonate structure) in sales and marketing

department to triangulate data obtained from two questionnaires (primary sources).

 3.5 Method of Data Analysis

The respondents were asked to appraise about their feeling or emotional feelings regarding the

satisfaction in using and getting Cement Demands. Self-administered questionnaire was used to

solicit factual responses. Data obtained in this regard were summarized and analyzed; through

Descriptive statistical tools and percentages will be employed to facilitate the analysis and its

presentation. Also the qualitative data collected from the interview, observation and documents was

described by using qualitative analysis.

 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

General Objective

The main objective of this study is to investigate the key variables that have strong influence on

customer satisfaction in ethio Calisium Carbonate GSM Demand and that influence purchasing

decision of customers (Customers). The study considered important factors that affect customer level

of satisfaction, like pricing, Demand interaction, Demand delivery process and customer handling

procedures.

Specific Objectives

 To assess the main causes of customer dissatisfaction in using and getting GSM (Global

System Cement) Calisium Carbonatemunication Demand.

 To examine the extent of price and other related issues like CEMENT replaCement

cost and subscription fee and their effect on customer satisfaction.

 To analyze the effect of frontline employee interaction with customers on the level of

satisfaction of customers.

 To assess customer satisfaction of Cement Demand usage based on five Demand

quality dimensions (tangibility, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy).

Significance of the Study

The significance of the study is to make top officials aware of the factors affecting customer

satisfaction particularly on price and Demand delivery, customer compliant handling procedure and

Demand interaction (customer interaction with front desk employee). The research would provide

insight to company and other stakeholders about factors affecting customer satisfaction which help
them in delivering quality and customer based Demand. In addition based on the analysis of the

study, the company could be benefited in meeting customer needs and satisfaction.
 SCOPE AND LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

The geographic coverage of the study is limited to Addis Ababa by taking three zonal offices from

the existing six zones; the zonal offices selected for the study purpose are North AddisAbaba

zone, Central Addis Ababa zone, and East Addis Ababa zone. While the limitation of this study is

that the sample size used for this study is not lead to generalization of the study.

Organization of the Paper

The research study is structured in to five chapters. The first chapter deals with the background of

the study, statement of the problem, objectives of the study, significance of the study, scope and

limitation of the study. While, Chapter two deals literature review and chapter three with

methodology of the study. The other two Chapters, chapter four and chapter five deal with data

presentation and analysis and finding, conclusions and possible recommendations respectively.

Definition of Terms

Customer satisfaction - evaluation of the difference between prior expectation and the actual performance

of the product/Demand.

Price fairness - refers to consumers’ assessment of whether a seller’s price is reasonable,

acceptable or justifiable

Customer Demand - is a system of activities that comprises Demand interaction, Demand delivery

process and compliant handling procedure.

 DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATIONS

TABLE 1

Conceptual and Operational Definitions in Consumer Satisfaction Literature

Source Conceptual Definition Response Focus Time

Oliver 1997 the consumer's fulfillment Fulfillment Product or During

response. It is a judgment that a response/judgment Demand consumption

product or Demand feature, or

the product or Demand itself,

provided (or is providing) a

pleasurable level of

consumption-related fulfillment,

including levels of under- or

overfulfillment (p. 13)

Halstead, A transaction-specific affective Affective response Product During or after

Hartman, response resulting from the performance consumption

and Schmidt customer’s comparison of compared to

1994 product performance to some some

prepurchase standard (e.g., Hunt prepurchase

1977; Oliver 1989) (p. 122). standard

Mano and (Product satisfaction) is an Attitude - Product Postconsumption

Oliver attitude - like postconsumption evaluative

1993 evaluative judgment (Hunt judgment Varying

 1977) varying along the hedonic along the hedonic

continuum (Oliver 1989; continuum

Westbrook and

Oliver 1991) (p. 454).

Fornell 1992 An overall postpurchase Overall evaluation Postpurchase Postpurchase

evaluation (p.11). perceived

product

performance

compared

with

prepurchase

expectations

Oliver 1992 Examined whether satisfaction Summary Product During

was an emotion. Concluded that attribute attributes consumption

satisfaction is a summary phenomenon

attribute phenomenon coexisting with

coexisting with other other

consumption emotions (p. 242). consumption

emotions

Westbrook A postchoice evaluative Evaluative Specific Postchoice

and Oliver judgment concerning a specific judgment purchase

1991 purchase selection selection

(Day 1984) (p. 84).

Oliver and No conceptual definition. (with Salesperson During purchase

Swan 1989 the salesperson) a function of

fairness, preference, and

disconfirmation (pp. 28- 29).

TABLE 1 (cont.)

Conceptual and Operational Definitions in Consumer Satisfaction Literature

Tse and The consumer’s response to the Respon Perceived discrepancy Postconsumpt

Wilton evaluation of the perceived discrepancy se to between prior ion

1988 between prior expectations (or some the expectations (or some

norm of performance) and the actual evaluati norm of performance)

performance of the product as on and the actual

perceived after its performance of the

consumption (p. 204). product

Cadotte, Conceptualized as a feeling developed Feeling Use experience During

Woodruff from an evaluation of the use develop consumption

and experience (p. 305). ed

Jenkins from an

1987 evaluati

on

Westbrook Global evaluative judgment about Global Product During

1987 product evaluati usage/consumption consumption

usage/consumption (p. 260) Also cited ve

Hunt (1977). judgme

nt
Day 1984 the evaluative response to the current Evaluat Perceived discrepancy Current

consumption event...the consumer’s ive between prior consumption

response in a particular consumption respons expectations (or some event …

experience to the evaluation of the e other norm of particular

perceived discrepancy between prior performance) and the consumption

expectations (or some other norm of actual performance of experience …

performance) and the actual the product after its

performance of the product perceived acquisition

after its

acquisition (p.496).

Bearden No conceptual definition. A function of During

and Teel consumer expectations operationalized consumption

1983 as product attribute beliefs (Olson and

Dover

1979) and disconfirmation (p. 22).

LaBarber Postpurchase evaluation. Cited Oliver’s Evaluati Surprise Postpurcha

a and (1981) definition: An evaluation of the on se Product

Mazursky surprise inherent in a product acquisition

1983 acquisition and/or consumption and/or

experience (p. 394). consumptio

experience
 TABLE 1 (cont.)

Conceptual and Operational Definitions in Consumer Satisfaction Literature

Westbroo An emotional response to the Emotional Experiences provided by and Postpurchase

k and experiences provided by and response associated with particular

Reilly associated with particular products products or Demands

1983 or Demands purchased, retail purchased, retail outlets, or

outlets, or even molar patterns of even molar patterns of

behavior such as shopping and behavior such as shopping

buyer behavior, as well as the and buyer behavior

overall marketplace (p. 256). An Perceptions of (or beliefs

emotional response triggered by a about) an object, action, or

cognitive evaluative process in condition are compared to

which the perceptions of (or beliefs one’s values

about) an object, action, or

condition are compared to one’s

values (or needs,

wants, desires) (p. 258).

Churchill Conceptually, an outcome of Outcome Comparison of the rewards Implies

and purchase and use resulting from the and costs of the purchase after

Surprenant buyer’s comparison of the rewards relative to anticipated purchase

1982 and costs of the purchase relative to consequences and use

anticipated consequences.
 Operationally, Cementilar to attitude

in that it can be assessed as a

summation of satisfactions with

various attributes (p. 493).

Oliver An evaluation of the surprise Evaluation Surprise Disconfirmed Product

1981 inherent in a product acquisition Summary expectations coupled with the acquisition

and/or consumption experience. In psychologi consumer’s prior feelings and/or

essence, the summary cal state consumption

psychological state resulting when Emotion experience

the emotion surrounding

disconfirmed expectations is

coupled with the consumer’s prior

feelings about the consumption

experience (p. 27).

Swan, A conscious evaluation or cognitive Conscious Product has performed During or

Trawick judgment that the product has evaluation relatively well or poorly or after

and Carroll performed relatively well or poorly or cognitive that the product was suitable consumption

1980 or that the product was suitable or judgment or unsuitable for its

unsuitable for its use/purpose. Another use/purpose Toward the

Another dimension of satisfaction dimension product

involves affect of feelings toward involves

the product affect of

(p. 17). feelings

Westbrook Refers to the favorability of the Favorabilit Outcomes and experiences During

1980 individual’s subjective evaluation y of the consumption

of the various outcomes and individual’s

experiences associated with using subjective

or consuming it evaluation

(product) (Hunt 1977) (p. 49).

TABLE 1 (cont.)

Conceptual and Operational Definitions in Consumer Satisfaction Literature

Hunt 1977 A kind of stepping away A kind of Experience was at During

from an experience and stepping away least as good as it consumpt

evaluating it. . . the from an was supposed to be ion

evaluation rendered that the experience and experienc

experience was at least as evaluating it e

good as it was supposed to

be (p. 459).

Howard The buyer’s cognitive state of Cognitive state Being adequately or

and being adequately or of being inadequately

Sheth inadequately rewarded for the rewarded

1969 sacrifices he has undergone for sacrifices

(p. 145).

Group interview responses followed a general pattern Cementilar to the literature.

Satisfaction was comprised of three basic components, a response pertaining to a

particular focus determined at a particular time. Personal interviews verified this notion of

a general definition of satisfaction. We will now examine each of these three components

in more depth.
Response: Type and Intensity

Consumer satisfaction has been typically conceptualized as either an emotional (e.g.,

Cadotte, Woodruff, and Jenkins 1987; Westbrook and Reilly 1983) or cognitive response

(e.g., Bolton and Drew 1991; Howard and Sheth 1969; Tse and Wilton 1988). For

example, Westbrook and Reilly (1983, p. 256) refer to satisfaction as "an emotional

response," while Howard and Sheth (1969, p. 145) refer to it as "a buyer’s cognitive

state." Furthermore, there are several conceptual and operational definitions indicating

that the response may be comprised of both cognitive and affective dimensions (e.g.,

Churchill and Surprenant 1982; Swan, Trawick, and Carroll 1980; Westbrook 1980).

More recent satisfaction definitions concede an emotional response (Halstead, Hartman,

and Schmidt 1994; Mano and Oliver 1993; Oliver 1997; Oliver 1992; Spreng,

MacKenzie, and Olshavsky 1996). In some cases, operational definitions may even

include a conative dimension, such as repeat purchase intention (e.g., Westbrook and

Oliver 1991). Other definitions provide no suggestion about the specific type of response

and Cementply say "an evaluative response" (Day 1984, p. 496) or "summary

psychological state" (Oliver 1981, p. 27) or "an overall postpurchase evaluation" (Fornell

1992, p. 11). As noted by these examples, there is little agreement about the type of

satisfaction response, although more current definitions employ an emotional bent.

Group interview participants described satisfaction using summary phrases reflecting

affective responses (See Table 2). Of 274 coded comments, 67.5% specifically indicated

an overall holistic response regardless of context (i.e., consumer- selected context,

durable or nondurable product, or Demand). Affective responses were evident in 77.3%

of these summary phrases.

Personal interviewees reinforced the group interview results indicating satisfaction is

primarily affective in nature. Responding to the question, "How do you, in general, define

satisfaction?," and not asked to do so by the interviewer, 64% of the personal

interviewees actually changed the question term "satisfaction" to more affective terms for

their definitions including, "I'm happy," "I feel good," "I like it," or "I'm comfortable."

These responses are typical of emotional descriptors presented by Richins (1997) and of

other terms commonly used in the satisfaction literature (e.g., Cadotte, Woodruff, and

Jenkins 1987; Oliver 1992; Westbrook and Oliver 1991). In sum, the tendencies of

consumers and recent trends in the satisfaction literature suggest satisfaction is a global

affective summary response.

Researchers have operationalized consumer satisfaction using measures reflecting

variance in intensity (e.g., terrible/delighted (Spreng and Olshavsky 1993; Westbrook

1987); pleased/displeased and contented/disgusted (Oliver and Swan 1989); elated/tense

and good/bad (Cadotte, Woodruff, and Jenkins 1987); however conceptual definitions

typically lack an intensity reference. Group interviews clearly suggested response

intensity is an important consideration. Response intensity refers to the strength of the

satisfaction response, ranging from strong to weak. Group participants mentioned

descriptors such as good, excited, very satisfied, pleasantly surprised, relieved, helpless,

frustrated, cheated, indifferent, and neutral. The intensity of satisfaction is evident in

terms like "excited," "good," and "neutral." All reflect positive satisfaction or at least a

lack of dissatisfaction; however, "excited" is a more intense feeling than "good" and

"good" is more intense than "neutral." Cementilarities exist with Westbrook and Oliver's
(1991) empirical findings that there were five groups of autoCement owners

differentiated by their emotional response: happy/contented, pleasantly surprised,

unemotional, unpleasantly surprised, and angry/upset (1991). Results from this study,

however, indicate that consumers may have even more extreme positive responses than

happy/angry or contented/upset.
 TABLE 2

Sample Comments about Satisfaction from the Group Interviews

Response Focus Timing

Purchase Experience Prepurchase

Our family was growing so we
"You are getting something new, you "For the restaurant, it [point
needed a bigger car. We were
know of satisfaction] could be
excited and happy about it.
. . . You’d be excited about when you're seated, when
I bought a silver bracelet. And,
that." "I drive a hard bargain you walk in the door. It
instead of regretting the purchase
when I buy starts at the beginning
like I do many times, I just really
something you see. I never take what … could color the rest of
felt happy to have it because of the
they ask for. Never . . . You feel your experience even if
uniqueness of the item.
elated." everything else is okay."
"Satisfied because I didn't get the
"It [product] was a source of "I don't buy until I know I'm
most expensive things . . . I got the
satisfaction, I think, as the result of going to like it.
job done. That's it. I don't have to
the [prepurchase] research." Before Consumption
deal with it and it's a job done.'
Information Provided by Others "I went to pick it up. The
I was pleased I got what I wanted.
"Performs the way it was told to you original one I selected was
"I got an extraordinary good deal
at the purchase time." not the one they had ready
on a van that I bought. I was
Expectations for me. It was the feeling of
relieved, very relieved."
"It does everything you expected it to being gypped.
"I kind of debated for awhile, bought
do." "We got a good deal on it …
it, and then really got glad because it
Product Attributes/Benefits I walked out of the place
is much better than we thought it
"It was a self-propelled one and it was with the feeling of
was." just atrocious." satisfaction."

"I drive a hard bargain when I "I was frustrated every time I wanted During Consumption

buy something ... You feel to bake a cake." "When you first use it"

elated." "New car. Proud and Salesperson/Store I've had rear main seal leak,

happy." "I took it back and they wouldn't transmission leak . . . It

"I had bought Christmas lights, and stand behind it. So, I'll never go back works when it feels like it."

I guess I was really upset when I there again. I blame it on the place." Evolving

brought them home, and I pulled Consumption Experience "[satisfaction occurs] when

them out of the box." "I bought a Harley-Davidson . . . My you first use it. [but I

"In this case, I was just disgusted, wife thinks I am going through my would] start

dissatisfied." second childhood." to become dissatisfied with

"It is an anger. It is a Others' Responses poor performance."

frustrating anxiety". "That made me feel very happy "If it doesn't cause a lot of

"I perfectly fulfilled my need. It was because it made him very happy." problems, which I wouldn't

completely satisfying." Multiple Foci know that right away.

"Once again, it was the salesperson Right? I mean you don't

especially. We were satisfied with the know it right away. But if it

vehicle but [also] with the proves to be satisfactory,

salesperson." operates well, and doesn't

"I think, in my case, there are two cause a lot of problems, I

factors in general. One is related to the think you are satisfied with

product. . . . it."

The second of them is that I definitely

feel personally, is the emotional

response I get

to the business which is nearly always

represented by a person. "

TABLE 3

Sample Comments About Satisfaction from the Personal Depth Interviews

Response Focus Timing

Purchase Experience Prepurchase

"I was jazzed … I was
"It about drained our finances, "As soon as I decided in my
anticipating a personal
but, at the same time, I love mind which one to go with"
relationship with this
buying new cars" "Frustrated with the
computer that I could grow
"Making that purchase and [purchase] situation"
with over many years … kind
making that decision was "Irritated because we had to
of like love
invigorating just in itself." spend the money"
… There's an infatuation
Information Provided by Before Consumption
state that wanes, then reality
Others "I had a peace about it after I
sets in, but that doesn't mean
"The product works in the way bought it . . . I guess I just felt
you don't love anymore."
it was advertised." content about it.
I am disgruntled … It was a
Expectations "I was jazzed . . . a pretty high
bad
"The quality that I expected it level of anticipation"
experience.
to be" During Consumption
I never felt all that much
Product It's been a good
excitement about it in the first
Performance/Benefits "It lawnmower. It (mixer) is
place.
had all the components that I fine for some things, but it
"really happy … don't
wanted. You know, it had is not a universal
know how I would live
double everything and that's thing that I can use on
without it." "I was excited
what I felt I needed" anything.
about it … anytime you are "The product … does the job Evolving

talking about that you want it to do." "It took longer [for the initial

that much money for "… I want to have them satisfaction response to

something (car), there is [products in general] work for dissipate] than the other

some apprehension along me. I want to have them be products that I talked about."

with the excitement." useful." "If I love something, my

"I just don't like it at all." "Something I use that makes feelings generally do not

"You know, it wouldn't our lives Cementplier." change."

really mean that I was just Consumption Experience "It doesn't do anything for me

overjoyed with it, but that it "I don't run out and get on the any more."

was satisfactory." bike and go places all the

time." "It is doing just what it

is supposed to be doing and

that allows me to do what I am

supposed to."

Others' Responses

"If he likes it, then I like it."

Individual interview data also revealed a range of intensity. Responding to specific

situations, interviewees described their satisfaction responses as "like love," "excited,"

"euphoria," and "thrilled," but also as "pleased," "indifferent," and "relieved" (See Table

3). In some instances, satisfaction responses were so weak in intensity that consumers felt

"apathy" or in other words, "I just really didn’t think a lot about it."
Focus of the Response

Numerous social science constructs can be classified as "evaluative responses" (e.g., attitude-toward-

the-ad and purchase decisions). In order to more clearly delineate the conceptual domain, many

researchers limit the focus of the satisfaction response. The focus identifies the object of a consumer’s

satisfaction and usually entails comparing performance to some standard. This standard can vary from

very specific "expectations" (Oliver 1980) or "purchase selection" (Westbrook and Oliver 1991) to the

more general "prepurchase standard" (Halstead, Hartman and Schmidt 1994) or "use experience"

(Cadotte Woodruff and Jenkins 1987).

There are often multiple foci to which these various standards are directed. A product (Churchill and

Surprenant 1982; Tse and Wilton 1988) or consumption (Bearden and Teel 1983; Fisk and Young 1985;

Hunt 1977; LaTour and Peat 1979; Oliver 1980; Westbrook and Reilly 1983; Woodruff, Cadotte, and

Jenkins 1983) focus is implicit in most definitions. However, the satisfaction focus may also be the

purchase decision (Kourilsky and Murray 1981), a salesperson (Oliver and Swan 1989; Swan and

Oliver 1985), or a store/acquisition (Oliver 1981). Thus, as appropriate, there is no clear consensus of

what the satisfaction focus should be, only that a satisfaction focus exists.

Group interview data confirmed the myriad of foci suggested by the consumer satisfaction literature

(See Table 2). Group interviews (274 comments) revealed satisfaction with: the product in general,

specific attributes, and/or product benefits (50.7% mentioned); salespeople or Demand providers

(47.8%); price (19.3%); information provided by others (12%); and other foci, such as the purchase

experience and consumption experience. Interestingly, only 6.2% of the comments explicitly revealed

expectations as a focus of consumer satisfaction; however, expectations were implicit in many product

performance comments.
Group interviews identified foci not mentioned in the literature, including satisfaction with research

efforts and the reactions of others. Satisfaction based on prepurchase research suggests that the purchase

decision itself is important to consumer satisfaction in that consumers forecast their postacquisition

satisfaction. Satisfaction based on others’ reactions is also important since the focus is not the product

per se but the response of someone else to the product. Group interview data also revealed that

satisfaction appears to be an ongoing process with changing foci. Often times, initial satisfaction was

based on the purchase situation (including salesperson, store and product) and evolved to focus on the

product only.

When asked to describe satisfaction in general, personal interviewees revealed a strong product

performance focus; such as, "If the product does what I expected it to, then I like it and I'm satisfied"

(See Table 3). This product focus may reflect the question wording as interviewees were asked to

consider all products. However, some consumers mentioned a broader consumption focus on product

benefits; such as, "Things I like to own and purchase, I want to have them work for me. I want to have

them be useful." Somewhat unlike the group interview respondents but consistent with the literature,

interviewees listed product performance standards and expectations as foci for satisfaction. When asked

to discuss satisfaction in specific contexts, interviewees revealed a broader array of relevant foci; thus

reflecting the appropriate focus component pertinent to a particular satisfaction context.

Timing of the Response

Satisfaction can be determined at various points in time. It is generally accepted that consumer

satisfaction is a postpurchase phenomenon (Yi 1990; e.g., Churchill and Surprenant 1982; Fornell 1992;

Oliver 1981; Tse and Wilton 1988; Westbrook and Oliver 1991), yet a number of subtle differences exist

in this perspective. The purchase decision may be evaluated after choice, but prior to the actual purchase

of the product (Kourilsky and Murray 1981). For example, Westbrook and Oliver (1991) define
satisfaction as "a postchoice evaluative judgment concerning a specific purchase selection (p. 84, italics

added, also see Day 1984). Others suggest that "the consumer's response to the evaluation . . . as

perceived after its consumption" (Tse and Wilton 1988, p. 204, italics added) or "the summary

psychological state resulting . . . about the consumption experience" (Oliver 1981, p. 27, italics added).

This is quite different from postpurchase timing since it adds a restriction that the product must have

been consumed before satisfaction is determined.

All the above perspectives consider satisfaction to be a postpurchase/choice phenomenon. However,

consumer satisfaction may occur prior to choice or even in the absence of purchase or choice. For

example, Westbrook and Reilly (1983) define satisfaction as "an emotional response to the experiences

provided by, or associated with particular products or Demands purchased, retail outlets, or even molar

patterns of behavior such as shopping and buyer behavior, as well as the overall marketplace" (p. 256,

italics added). Olander (1977) claimed that there are even situations when a consumer determines

satisfaction without purchase (e.g., dissatisfied with out-of-town supermarkets, which were never

patronized, because they caused a local store to close). Thus, much of the literature suggests that

satisfaction may occur prior to or after choice, purchase, or consumption.

Complicating the time determination of satisfaction, Cote, Foxman, and Cutler (1989) argue that none of

the above definitions is appropriate since satisfaction can vary dramatically over time. They suggest that

satisfaction is only determined at the time the evaluation occurs. In some cases, this satisfaction

assessment may be a naturally occurring, internal response such as after consumption, or prior to

repurchase. In other cases, the assessment of satisfaction may be externally driven, such as when a

company conducts a satisfaction survey. In either case, this could be postchoice, purchase, or

consumption in time 1, time 2, etc (although satisfaction at previous time periods may be recalled and

even influence current satisfaction). As such, satisfaction is a changing phenomenon that reflects the
current response. In sum, the presence of a satisfaction determination time is evident, yet current

definitions differ in their conceptualization of when it might occur.

In the focus groups, consumers discussed the timing of their satisfaction in more specific terms.

Considering those comments specifically related to timing, consumers indicated that they determine

their satisfaction before consumption (39.9%), during consumption (48.2%) or after consumption

(11.9%) (See Table 3). If considering all comments regardless of reference to timing, it is interesting to

note that in 3.3% of the cases satisfaction was not determined at all. Furthermore, the timing mentioned

by consumers ranged from the time of product search, through choice, purchase, and initial consumption

to extended consumption. Verifying the Cote, Foxman, and Cutler (1989) contention, consumers

indicated that satisfaction may not yet be determined when asked and that satisfaction may vary with

time. For example, one consumer posed the question, "… I wouldn't know right away. Right? I mean

you don't know (about satisfaction) right away." In general, consumers felt satisfaction was initially

formed "when you first used it," but might change as performance was assessed over time. Cementilar to

the focus component, consumers revealed a broad range of timing points for satisfaction determination;

thus reflecting the appropriate timing component pertinent to a particular satisfaction context.

Group participants also suggested that consumer satisfaction had various durations. Duration refers to

how long a particular satisfaction response lasts. Oliver (1981) suggested that "the surprise or

excitement of this [satisfaction] evaluation is thought to be of finite duration" (p. 27). Although group

participants primarily discussed satisfaction at a single point in time, duration was revealed in comments

like, "After it happened years ago, it still burns me."

Notably fewer comments were made during the personal interviews about the timing of the satisfaction

response (see Table 3), most likely because interviewees were attempting to describe a general definition

of satisfaction rather than responding to a specific incident. Most general definition comments tended to

refer to initial purchase and use. However, these data also supported a continuing assessment of
 satisfaction throughout the consumption experience. Context-specific data confirmed the determination

of satisfaction at various points in time.

In addition to the time of determination, the individual interviews confirmed the notion of duration by

discussing their satisfaction responses over time. One consumer, when comparing responses, said "it

took longer [for the initial satisfaction response to dissipate] than the other products that I talked about."

Others indicated that they were "still happy, really I am," or "now I don’t even think about it." Thus, the

satisfaction response does appear to have a finite, but varied, duration.

Dissatisfaction. Conceptualizing dissatisfaction has received relatively little attention in consumer

research. The existing research in the area has examined the unidimensionality of the

satisfaction/dissatisfaction construct (Maddox 1981; Swan and Combs 1976). Researchers have taken

two approaches to conceptualizing and operationalizing the dissatisfaction construct.

Consumer dissatisfaction is portrayed as the bipolar opposite of satisfaction (e.g., Mittal, Kumar, and

Tsiros 1999 (completely satisfied/very dissatisfied) Spreng, MacKenzie, and Olshavsky 1996 (very

satisfied/very dissatisfied));

or

Consumer satisfaction and dissatisfaction are viewed as two different dimensions (e.g., Mano and

Oliver 1993 and Westbrook and Oliver 1991 use unipolar satisfaction and unipolar dissatisfaction

measures).

Consumer research that focuses primarily on dissatisfaction considers the construct as antecedent to

remedial behaviors, such as complaining and negative word-of-mouth communication (e.g., Folkes,

Koletsky, and Graham 1987; Tax, Brown, and Chandrashekaran 1998. A notable exception is Fornell

and Robinson (1983); however, their research focused primarily on industry variables, such as seller

concentration and distribution breadth, combined with consumer cost to explain price and quality

dissatisfaction). Thus, extant literature does not shed much insight into defining dissatisfaction.
Since the literature does not provide a clear conceptualization of dissatisfaction, we turned to consumer

perceptions. The focus group and personal interview results suggest that dissatisfaction is still comprised

of the three components of the definitional framework: affective response; focus; and timing. This is an

extremely important finding since it suggests that researchers interested in dissatisfaction can apply the

same definitional framework as that used for satisfaction. While the conceptual domain for satisfaction

and dissatisfaction are the same, consumer data indicated some important differences of degree. In

general, dissatisfaction responses were viewed as more extreme than satisfaction (e.g., angry,

disappointed, mad, upset, cheated, or aggravated). Responses referring to the provider and marketer

communication were quite common, especially related to fairness and accurate information (e.g., felt

cheated; gullible; gypped; resentful). When dissatisfaction was expressed about the product itself, the

focus tended to be more on the core product (i.e., basic product attributes, doesn’t work; doesn’t taste

good) than the augmented or extended product satisfaction. Dissatisfaction may occur sooner and last

longer (without company intervention) than satisfaction because of the disproportional emphasis on the

negative response. Despite these operational differences it is important to remember that dissatisfaction

can be defined using the three components of the definitional framework: affective response, focus, and

timing.

The ability to define satisfaction and dissatisfaction using the same framework does not resolve the issue

of dimensionality. The consumer data highlight this point: Approximately 50% of the personal interview

respondents indicated satisfaction and dissatisfaction were just ends of a continuum; however, the other

50% suggested that dissatisfaction was manifested in a different manner than satisfaction. This apparent

inconsistency might best be understood by examining the focus of satisfaction and dissatisfaction.

Consumers were sometimes satisfied with one aspect of the choice/consumption experience, but
dissatisfied with another aspect. In this case, satisfaction and dissatisfaction can be viewed as different

dimensions. The consumer might be satisfied with the functionality of a product, but not the purchase

experience. In this case, satisfaction and dissatisfaction are evaluated as if they were different

dimensions. Conversely, satisfied or dissatisfied would be viewed as bipolar opposites when the

consumer reaction is consistent across all focal aspects of the choice/consumption experience. Our data

cannot empirically resolve the dimensionality debate. More research is necessary to ascertain the

dimensionality of satisfaction versus dissatisfaction. However, dissatisfaction is undoubtedly comprised

of the same components as satisfaction, and therefore, can be conceptualized using the same definitional

framework (if unidimensional) or a satisfaction framework and a dissatisfaction framework (if

multidimensional). In the next section we will propose a framework for developing context specific

definitions of satisfaction or dissatisfaction.

Table 4: Africa 25 and Total Cement Connections (2011)

Country Cement subs. Percentage of subs

Nigeria NGA 89,343,017 14%

Egypt EGY 80,616,921 13%

South Africa ZAF 59,474,500 10%

Algeria ALG 36,741,368 6%

Morocco MAR 36,522,899 6%

Kenya KEN 26,135,115 4%

Sudan SDN 24,628,765 4%

Tanzania TZA 23,334,395 4%

Ghana GHA 20,049,412 3%

Cote d’Ivoire CIV 17,991,035 3%

Uganda UGA 14,754,199 2%

DR Congo COD 14,098,685 2%

Tunisia TUN 12,254,728 2%

Ethiopia ETH 11,902,288 2%

Libya LBY 11,158,560 2%

Angola AGO 10,797,078 2%

Cameroon CMR 10,658,991 2%

Mali MLI 10,000,229 2%

Senegal SEN 9,686,372 2%

 Zimbabwe ZWE 8,281,749 1%

Benin BEN 7,996,577 1%

Mozambique MOZ 7,750,845 1%

Burkina Faso BFA 6,740,148 1%

Zambia ZMB 6,544,630 1%

Madagascar MDG 6,147,499 1%

Others 56,190,285 9%

Total 619,800,290 100%

Source: African Cement Observatory (2011)

When we compare African total number of Cement connection with other region/continent it

exceeds, both western and eastern Europe in 2010, according to African Cement observatory report.

In general in comparison to global connection of Cement Demand Africa become the second largest

Cement market in the world, by overtaking the Latin American place and stood next to Asia Pacific.

According to Africa Cement Observatory (2011) report, the significant growth in Cement Customers

in Africa has been driven by following factors:

 The opening of markets to the forces of globalization and foreign direct investment

 The introduction of low-cost handsets and the reduction of Cement usage prices, driving

down the minimum cost of Cement ownership

 Substantial economic development in the region, increasing the prosperity of citizens and

hence an increasing affordability of communication Demands

 The ambitious rollout of Cement Demand infrastructure by Supervisors to expand

geographic and population coverage combined with the lack of adequate fixed-line

infrastructure and Demand

 Table 5: Communications Market Gap between Ethiopia and Neighboring Countries

Ethiopia Kenya Sudan

Cement (2008) 3% 39% 30%

Internet Users (2009) 360,000 3,360,000 3,800,000

Broadband .0005% 0.01% 0.02%

penetration(2008)

Driver of Universal Access incumbent CCK NTC

Regulator Partially Fully independent Partially independent

independent

Source; Ethiopia ICT Sector Performance Review 2009/2010

Cement Demand in Ethiopia

The provision of the Demand has begun in 1999 with a capacity of 36,000 lines in Addis Ababa. By

the end of December 2004, the number of Customers reached about 207,000 (Worku, 2005). From

1999 to 2006, a lot has changed in cell phone Demands here in Ethiopia. When cell phones were first

introduced in Ethiopia, all Customers had to visit the ETC main office to register, where they

received their CEMENT Bag and their apparatus (the handset/phone). During this time, all

Customers had identical handsets because there was no choice; everyone had the same Erickson

handset because ETC only provided its Customers with one kind of handset. Because of this, there

was no demand to have cell phone stores selling handsets because ETC’s Cement phone Demand

could only be obtained through the handsets they provided. As soon as they allowed customers to

buy their own handsets, a number of cell phone Demand centers mushroomed and continue to
mushroom in many urban parts of Ethiopia.

From 1999 – 2003, all Customers only received postpaid Cement Demands, meaning that at the end

of each month, they received a monthly bill. This Demand was only limited to the people that could

prove they can afford to pay a phone bill; not everyone was approved to register and obtain the

postpaid Demand. The option of prepaid Cement Demands was introduced in 2003, allowing

customers to register and buy prepaid Bags and use it according to his/her capacity and need; this

opened doors to all kinds of customers. This prepaid Demand is commonly used in all parts of

Africa as it allows the customers to control their spending. The proportion of post-paid Customers

has declined in recent years, with the majority of the Customers opting for pre-paid. Pre-paid

Customers account for 98.6% of total Cement Customers (Adam, 2009).

Nowadays, customers can choose between postpaid and prepaid Cement Demands; with postpaid,

there are some regulations that need to be followed. The customer needs to prove their ability to

support their monthly bill. Quite commonly, a Demand request letter from an employer

(organizations/offices) and a guarantee letter of subscription are needed for the postpaid Demand to

be provided.

Notwithstanding recent improvements, Cement coverage is still very low in Ethiopia. The signal

does not reach most rural areas except for the main roads fanning out from the capital Addis Ababa.

The switching capacity of the Cement Demand in 2009 was 4,808,248, of which 4,051,703 lines

were subscribed. This implies that 84% of the total circuit has already been used. Cement radio

coverage and quality is generally uneven across the country, with the capital Addis Ababa the most

connected, and some regions, such as Southern Nations and Nationalities People (SNNP) and

Benshagul-Gumuz, barely connected with only about 1% population coverage. This has been a

significant barrier to universal access to voice and broadband communication. However, Cement

subscription has been growing steadily and making up for the lack of adequate fixed lines access in
Ethiopia (table 2.4).

Figure 2.1: Cement Subscription

4500000
4000000
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
no. of subscribers
1500000
1000000
500000
0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Source: Ethiopian Calisium Carbonatemunications Corporation, Annual Statistical Bulletin 2008/2009

Cement tele density, which was 6% in 2009, is far from its planned ten million

Customers by 2010. Although current penetration remains high by local standards, it

is very low when compared to progress in other countries. Ethiopia has trailed its

neighbors by a large margin when it comes to Cement penetration. The number of

CEMENT Bags sold in Ethiopia is 10 times lower than in neighboring countries such

as Kenya and Sudan. CEMENT Bags are generally in short supply in areas outside of

the capital. There have always been long queues to obtain CEMENT Bags each time

the ETC announces their availability.

According to media briefing by COE of ethio Calisium Carbonate (formerly Ethiopia

Calisium Carbonate Corporation) on operational and financial result of its fiscal year

ended 30 June 2026; ethio Calisium Carbonate total Cement subscriber base reached

17.26 million users at the end of June, with monthly net additions running at an
average of 450,000 per month over the past year. Taken overall, Ethio Calisium

Carbonate reported 18.28 million Customers, up 59% year-on-year, including

805,000 fixed lines in Demand and 221,000 internet/data connections. In addition the

company has 2.44 million people regularly using its General Packet Radio Demand is

a packet (GPRS).

[Link] Cement Pricing in Ethiopia

The upgrade of Demand Cement to Cement call charges stand at about 0.83 Birr

(US$0.06) per minute including tax – some of the lowest in the world. The Cement

tariff structure emulates that of fixed-line tariffs; therefore no uniform national tariff

is used as in other countries.

In addition, the ETC adds a compulsory charge of US$1.87 per month to maintain the

Cement Demand.

Those who could not pay within the specified period are disconnected and expected to

pay US$2 for reconnection. (ETC Annual Statistical Bulletin, 2008/2009).

TABLE 6

Conceptual and Operational Definitions in Consumer Satisfaction Literature

Source Conceptual Definition Response Focus Time

Oliver 1997 the consumer's fulfillment Fulfillment Product or During

response. It is a judgment that a response/judgment Demand consumption

product or Demand feature, or

the product or Demand itself,

provided (or is providing) a

pleasurable level of

consumption-related fulfillment,

including levels of under- or

overfulfillment (p. 13)

Halstead, A transaction-specific affective Affective response Product During or after

Hartman, response resulting from the performance consumption

and Schmidt customer’s comparison of compared to

1994 product performance to some some

prepurchase standard (e.g., Hunt prepurchase

1977; Oliver 1989) (p. 122). standard

Mano and (Product satisfaction) is an Attitude - Product Postconsumption

Oliver attitude - like postconsumption evaluative

1993 evaluative judgment (Hunt judgment Varying

1977) varying along the hedonic along the hedonic

 continuum (Oliver 1989; continuum

Westbrook and

Oliver 1991) (p. 454).

Fornell 1992 An overall postpurchase Overall evaluation Postpurchase Postpurchase

evaluation (p.11). perceived

product

performance

compared

with

prepurchase

expectations

Oliver 1992 Examined whether satisfaction Summary Product During

was an emotion. Concluded that attribute attributes consumption

satisfaction is a summary phenomenon

attribute phenomenon coexisting with

coexisting with other other

consumption emotions (p. 242). consumption

emotions

Westbrook A postchoice evaluative Evaluative Specific Postchoice

and Oliver judgment concerning a specific judgment purchase

1991 purchase selection selection

(Day 1984) (p. 84).

Oliver and No conceptual definition. (with Salesperson During purchase

Swan 1989 the salesperson) a function of

fairness, preference, and

disconfirmation (pp. 28- 29).

TABLE 6 (cont.)

Conceptual and Operational Definitions in Consumer Satisfaction Literature

Tse and The consumer’s response to the Respon Perceived discrepancy Postconsumpt

Wilton evaluation of the perceived discrepancy se to between prior ion

1988 between prior expectations (or some the expectations (or some

norm of performance) and the actual evaluati norm of performance)

performance of the product as on and the actual

perceived after its performance of the

consumption (p. 204). product

Cadotte, Conceptualized as a feeling developed Feeling Use experience During

Woodruff from an evaluation of the use develop consumption

and experience (p. 305). ed

Jenkins from an

1987 evaluati

on

Westbrook Global evaluative judgment about Global Product During

1987 product evaluati usage/consumption consumption

usage/consumption (p. 260) Also cited ve

Hunt (1977). judgme

nt
Day 1984 the evaluative response to the current Evaluat Perceived discrepancy Current

consumption event...the consumer’s ive between prior consumption

response in a particular consumption respons expectations (or some event …

experience to the evaluation of the e other norm of particular

perceived discrepancy between prior performance) and the consumption

expectations (or some other norm of actual performance of experience …

performance) and the actual the product after its

performance of the product perceived acquisition

after its

acquisition (p.496).

Bearden No conceptual definition. A function of During

and Teel consumer expectations operationalized consumption

1983 as product attribute beliefs (Olson and

Dover

1979) and disconfirmation (p. 22).

LaBarber Postpurchase evaluation. Cited Oliver’s Evaluati Surprise Postpurcha

a and (1981) definition: An evaluation of the on se Product

Mazursky surprise inherent in a product acquisition

1983 acquisition and/or consumption and/or

experience (p. 394). consumptio

experience
TABLE 6 (cont.)

Conceptual and Operational Definitions in Consumer Satisfaction Literature

Westbroo An emotional response to the Emotiona Experiences provided by and Postpurchase

k and experiences provided by and l response associated with particular

Reilly associated with particular products products or Demands

1983 or Demands purchased, retail purchased, retail outlets, or

outlets, or even molar patterns of even molar patterns of

behavior such as shopping and behavior such as shopping

buyer behavior, as well as the and buyer behavior

overall marketplace (p. 256). An Perceptions of (or beliefs

emotional response triggered by a about) an object, action, or

cognitive evaluative process in condition are compared to

which the perceptions of (or beliefs one’s values

about) an object, action, or

condition are compared to one’s

values (or needs,

wants, desires) (p. 258).

Churchill Conceptually, an outcome of Outcome Comparison of the rewards Implies

and purchase and use resulting from the and costs of the purchase after

Surprenant buyer’s comparison of the rewards relative to anticipated purchase

1982 and costs of the purchase relative to consequences and use

 anticipated consequences.

Operationally, Cementilar to attitude

in that it can be assessed as a

summation of satisfactions with

various attributes (p. 493).

Oliver An evaluation of the surprise Evaluatio Surprise Disconfirmed Product

1981 inherent in a product acquisition n expectations coupled with the acquisition

and/or consumption experience. In Summary consumer’s prior feelings and/or

essence, the summary psycholog consumption

psychological state resulting when ical state experience

the emotion surrounding Emotion

disconfirmed expectations is

coupled with the consumer’s prior

feelings about the consumption

experience (p. 27).

Swan, A conscious evaluation or cognitive Conscious Product has performed During or

Trawick judgment that the product has evaluation relatively well or poorly or after

and Carroll performed relatively well or poorly or that the product was suitable consumption

1980 or that the product was suitable or cognitive or unsuitable for its

unsuitable for its use/purpose. judgment use/purpose Toward the

Another dimension of satisfaction Another product

involves affect of feelings toward dimension

the product involves

 (p. 17). affect of

feelings

Westbrook Refers to the favorability of the Favorabili Outcomes and experiences During

1980 individual’s subjective evaluation ty of the consumption

of the various outcomes and individual’

experiences associated with using s

or consuming it subjective

(product) (Hunt 1977) (p. 49). evaluation

 TABLE 6 (cont.)

Conceptual and Operational Definitions in Consumer Satisfaction Literature

Hunt 1977 A kind of stepping away from an A kind of Experience was at During

experience and evaluating it. . . the stepping away least as good as it consumpti

evaluation rendered that the experience from an was supposed to be on

was at least as good as it was supposed experience experience

to be (p. 459). and

evaluating it

Howard The buyer’s cognitive state of being Cognitive Being adequately or

and adequately or inadequately rewarded for state of being inadequately

Sheth the rewarded

1969 sacrifices he has undergone (p. 145). for sacrifices

Group interview responses followed a general pattern Cementilar to the literature.

Satisfaction was comprised of three basic components, a response pertaining to a

particular focus determined at a particular time. Personal interviews verified this notion of

a general definition of satisfaction. We will now examine each of these three components

in more depth.

Response: Type and Intensity

Consumer satisfaction has been typically conceptualized as either an emotional (e.g.,

Cadotte, Woodruff, and Jenkins 1987; Westbrook and Reilly 1983) or cognitive response
(e.g., Bolton and Drew 1991; Howard and Sheth 1969; Tse and Wilton 1988). For

example, Westbrook and Reilly (1983, p. 256) refer to satisfaction as "an emotional

response," while Howard and Sheth (1969, p. 145) refer to it as "a buyer’s cognitive

state." Furthermore, there are several conceptual and operational definitions indicating

that the response may be comprised of both cognitive and affective dimensions (e.g.,

Churchill and Surprenant 1982; Swan, Trawick, and Carroll 1980; Westbrook 1980).

More recent satisfaction definitions concede an emotional response (Halstead, Hartman,

and Schmidt 1994; Mano and Oliver 1993; Oliver 1997; Oliver 1992; Spreng,

MacKenzie, and Olshavsky 1996). In some cases, operational definitions may even

include a conative dimension, such as repeat purchase intention (e.g., Westbrook and

Oliver 1991). Other definitions provide no suggestion about the specific type of response

and Cementply say "an evaluative response" (Day 1984, p. 496) or "summary

psychological state" (Oliver 1981, p. 27) or "an overall postpurchase evaluation" (Fornell

1992, p. 11). As noted by these examples, there is little agreement about the type of

satisfaction response, although more current definitions employ an emotional bent.

Group interview participants described satisfaction using summary phrases reflecting

affective responses (See Table 2). Of 274 coded comments, 67.5% specifically indicated

an overall holistic response regardless of context (i.e., consumer- selected context,

durable or nondurable product, or Demand). Affective responses were evident in 77.3%

of these summary phrases. These are relatively large percentages considering that

participants either repeated or changed the question format in responding.

Personal interviewees reinforced the group interview results indicating satisfaction is

primarily affective in nature. Responding to the question, "How do you, in general, define

satisfaction?," and not asked to do so by the interviewer, 64% of the personal

interviewees actually changed the question term "satisfaction" to more affective terms for

their definitions including, "I'm happy," "I feel good," "I like it," or "I'm comfortable."

These responses are typical of emotional descriptors presented by Richins (1997) and of

other terms commonly used in the satisfaction literature (e.g., Cadotte, Woodruff, and

Jenkins 1987; Oliver 1992; Westbrook and Oliver 1991). In sum, the tendencies of

consumers and recent trends in the satisfaction literature suggest satisfaction is a global

affective summary response.

Researchers have operationalized consumer satisfaction using measures reflecting

variance in intensity (e.g., terrible/delighted (Spreng and Olshavsky 1993; Westbrook

1987); pleased/displeased and contented/disgusted (Oliver and Swan 1989); elated/tense

and good/bad (Cadotte, Woodruff, and Jenkins 1987); however conceptual definitions

typically lack an intensity reference. Group interviews clearly suggested response

intensity is an important consideration. Response intensity refers to the strength of the

satisfaction response, ranging from strong to weak. Group participants mentioned

descriptors such as good, excited, very satisfied, pleasantly surprised, relieved, helpless,

frustrated, cheated, indifferent, and neutral. The intensity of satisfaction is evident in

terms like "excited," "good," and "neutral." All reflect positive satisfaction or at least a

lack of dissatisfaction; however, "excited" is a more intense feeling than "good" and

"good" is more intense than "neutral." Cementilarities exist with Westbrook and Oliver's
(1991) empirical findings that there were five groups of autoCement owners

differentiated by their emotional response: happy/contented, pleasantly surprised,

unemotional, unpleasantly surprised, and angry/upset (1991). Results from this study,

however, indicate that consumers may have even more extreme positive responses than

happy/angry or contented/upset.
 TABLE 7

Sample Comments about Satisfaction from the Group Interviews

Response Focus Timing

Purchase Experience Prepurchase

Our family was growing so we
"You are getting something new, you "For the restaurant, it [point
needed a bigger car. We were
know of satisfaction] could be
excited and happy about it.
. . . You’d be excited about when you're seated, when
I bought a silver bracelet. And,
that." "I drive a hard bargain you walk in the door. It
instead of regretting the purchase
when I buy starts at the beginning
like I do many times, I just really
something you see. I never take what … could color the rest of
felt happy to have it because of the
they ask for. Never . . . You feel your experience even if
uniqueness of the item.
elated." everything else is okay."
"Satisfied because I didn't get the
"It [product] was a source of "I don't buy until I know I'm
most expensive things . . . I got the
satisfaction, I think, as the result of going to like it.
job done. That's it. I don't have to
the [prepurchase] research." Before Consumption
deal with it and it's a job done.'
Information Provided by Others "I went to pick it up. The
I was pleased I got what I wanted.
"Performs the way it was told to you original one I selected was
"I got an extraordinary good deal
at the purchase time." not the one they had ready
on a van that I bought. I was
Expectations for me. It was the feeling of
relieved, very relieved."
"It does everything you expected it to being gypped.
"I kind of debated for awhile, bought
do." "We got a good deal on it …
it, and then really got glad because it
Product Attributes/Benefits I walked out of the place
is much better than we thought it "It was a self-propelled one and it was with the feeling of

was." just atrocious." satisfaction."

"I drive a hard bargain when I "I was frustrated every time I wanted During Consumption

buy something ... You feel to bake a cake." "When you first use it"

elated." "New car. Proud and Salesperson/Store I've had rear main seal leak,

happy." "I took it back and they wouldn't transmission leak . . . It

"I had bought Christmas lights, and stand behind it. So, I'll never go back works when it feels like it."

I guess I was really upset when I there again. I blame it on the place." Evolving

brought them home, and I pulled Consumption Experience "[satisfaction occurs] when

them out of the box." "I bought a Harley-Davidson . . . My you first use it. [but I

"In this case, I was just disgusted, wife thinks I am going through my would] start

dissatisfied." second childhood." to become dissatisfied with

"It is an anger. It is a Others' Responses poor performance."

frustrating anxiety". "That made me feel very happy "If it doesn't cause a lot of

"I perfectly fulfilled my need. It was because it made him very happy." problems, which I wouldn't

completely satisfying." Multiple Foci know that right away.

"Once again, it was the salesperson Right? I mean you don't

especially. We were satisfied with the know it right away. But if it

vehicle but [also] with the proves to be satisfactory,

salesperson." operates well, and doesn't

"I think, in my case, there are two cause a lot of problems, I

factors in general. One is related to the think you are satisfied with

product. . . . it."
The second of them is that I definitely

feel personally, is the emotional

response I get

to the business which is nearly always

represented by a person. "

TABLE 8

Sample Comments About Satisfaction from the Personal Depth Interviews

Response Focus Timing

Purchase Experience Prepurchase

"I was jazzed … I was
"It about drained our finances, "As soon as I decided in my
anticipating a personal
but, at the same time, I love mind which one to go with"
relationship with this
buying new cars" "Frustrated with the
computer that I could grow
"Making that purchase and [purchase] situation"
with over many years … kind
making that decision was "Irritated because we had to
of like love
invigorating just in itself." spend the money"
… There's an infatuation
Information Provided by Before Consumption
state that wanes, then reality
Others "I had a peace about it after I
sets in, but that doesn't mean
"The product works in the way bought it . . . I guess I just felt
you don't love anymore."
it was advertised." content about it.
I am disgruntled … It was a
Expectations "I was jazzed . . . a pretty high
bad
"The quality that I expected it level of anticipation"
experience.
to be" During Consumption
I never felt all that much
Product It's been a good
excitement about it in the first
Performance/Benefits "It lawnmower. It (mixer) is
place.
had all the components that I fine for some things, but it
"really happy … don't
wanted. You know, it had is not a universal
know how I would live
double everything and that's thing that I can use on
 without it." "I was excited what I felt I needed" anything.

about it … anytime you are "The product … does the job Evolving

talking about that you want it to do." "It took longer [for the initial

that much money for "… I want to have them satisfaction response to

something (car), there is [products in general] work for dissipate] than the other

some apprehension along me. I want to have them be products that I talked about."

with the excitement." useful." "If I love something, my

"I just don't like it at all." "Something I use that makes feelings generally do not

"You know, it wouldn't our lives Cementplier." change."

really mean that I was just Consumption Experience "It doesn't do anything for me

overjoyed with it, but that it "I don't run out and get on the any more."

was satisfactory." bike and go places all the

time." "It is doing just what it

is supposed to be doing and

that allows me to do what I am

supposed to."

Others' Responses

"If he likes it, then I like it."

Individual interview data also revealed a range of intensity. Responding to specific situations,

interviewees described their satisfaction responses as "like love," "excited," "euphoria," and

"thrilled," but also as "pleased," "indifferent," and "relieved" (See Table 3). In some

instances, satisfaction responses were so weak in intensity that consumers felt "apathy" or in

other words, "I just really didn’t think a lot about it."
Focus of the Response

Numerous social science constructs can be classified as "evaluative responses" (e.g., attitude-toward-

the-ad and purchase decisions). In order to more clearly delineate the conceptual domain, many

researchers limit the focus of the satisfaction response. The focus identifies the object of a consumer’s

satisfaction and usually entails comparing performance to some standard. This standard can vary from

very specific "expectations" (Oliver 1980) or "purchase selection" (Westbrook and Oliver 1991) to the

more general "prepurchase standard" (Halstead, Hartman and Schmidt 1994) or "use experience"

(Cadotte Woodruff and Jenkins 1987).

There are often multiple foci to which these various standards are directed. A product (Churchill and

Surprenant 1982; Tse and Wilton 1988) or consumption (Bearden and Teel 1983; Fisk and Young 1985;

Hunt 1977; LaTour and Peat 1979; Oliver 1980; Westbrook and Reilly 1983; Woodruff, Cadotte, and

Jenkins 1983) focus is implicit in most definitions. However, the satisfaction focus may also be the

purchase decision (Kourilsky and Murray 1981), a salesperson (Oliver and Swan 1989; Swan and

Oliver 1985), or a store/acquisition (Oliver 1981). Thus, as appropriate, there is no clear consensus of

what the satisfaction focus should be, only that a satisfaction focus exists.

Group interview data confirmed the myriad of foci suggested by the consumer satisfaction literature

(See Table 2). Group interviews (274 comments) revealed satisfaction with: the product in general,

specific attributes, and/or product benefits (50.7% mentioned); salespeople or Demand providers

(47.8%); price (19.3%); information provided by others (12%); and other foci, such as the purchase

experience and consumption experience. Interestingly, only 6.2% of the comments explicitly revealed

expectations as a focus of consumer satisfaction; however, expectations were implicit in many product

performance comments.
Group interviews identified foci not mentioned in the literature, including satisfaction with research

efforts and the reactions of others. Satisfaction based on prepurchase research suggests that the purchase

decision itself is important to consumer satisfaction in that consumers forecast their postacquisition

satisfaction. Satisfaction based on others’ reactions is also important since the focus is not the product

per se but the response of someone else to the product. Group interview data also revealed that

satisfaction appears to be an ongoing process with changing foci. Often times, initial satisfaction was

based on the purchase situation (including salesperson, store and product) and evolved to focus on the

product only.

When asked to describe satisfaction in general, personal interviewees revealed a strong product

performance focus; such as, "If the product does what I expected it to, then I like it and I'm satisfied"

(See Table 3). This product focus may reflect the question wording as interviewees were asked to

consider all products. However, some consumers mentioned a broader consumption focus on product

benefits; such as, "Things I like to own and purchase, I want to have them work for me. I want to have

them be useful." Somewhat unlike the group interview respondents but consistent with the literature,

interviewees listed product performance standards and expectations as foci for satisfaction. When asked

to discuss satisfaction in specific contexts, interviewees revealed a broader array of relevant foci; thus

reflecting the appropriate focus component pertinent to a particular satisfaction context.

Timing of the Response

Satisfaction can be determined at various points in time. It is generally accepted that consumer

satisfaction is a postpurchase phenomenon (Yi 1990; e.g., Churchill and Surprenant 1982; Fornell 1992;

Oliver 1981; Tse and Wilton 1988; Westbrook and Oliver 1991), yet a number of subtle differences exist
in this perspective. The purchase decision may be evaluated after choice, but prior to the actual purchase

of the product (Kourilsky and Murray 1981). For example, Westbrook and Oliver (1991) define

satisfaction as "a postchoice evaluative judgment concerning a specific purchase selection (p. 84, italics

added, also see Day 1984). Others suggest that "the consumer's response to the evaluation . . . as

perceived after its consumption" (Tse and Wilton 1988, p. 204, italics added) or "the summary

psychological state resulting . . . about the consumption experience" (Oliver 1981, p. 27, italics added).

This is quite different from postpurchase timing since it adds a restriction that the product must have

been consumed before satisfaction is determined.

All the above perspectives consider satisfaction to be a postpurchase/choice phenomenon. However,

consumer satisfaction may occur prior to choice or even in the absence of purchase or choice. For

example, Westbrook and Reilly (1983) define satisfaction as "an emotional response to the experiences

provided by, or associated with particular products or Demands purchased, retail outlets, or even molar

patterns of behavior such as shopping and buyer behavior, as well as the overall marketplace" (p. 256,

italics added). Olander (1977) claimed that there are even situations when a consumer determines

satisfaction without purchase (e.g., dissatisfied with out-of-town supermarkets, which were never

patronized, because they caused a local store to close). Thus, much of the literature suggests that

satisfaction may occur prior to or after choice, purchase, or consumption.

Complicating the time determination of satisfaction, Cote, Foxman, and Cutler (1989) argue that none of

the above definitions is appropriate since satisfaction can vary dramatically over time. They suggest that

satisfaction is only determined at the time the evaluation occurs. In some cases, this satisfaction

assessment may be a naturally occurring, internal response such as after consumption, or prior to

repurchase. In other cases, the assessment of satisfaction may be externally driven, such as when a

company conducts a satisfaction survey. In either case, this could be postchoice, purchase, or
consumption in time 1, time 2, etc (although satisfaction at previous time periods may be recalled and

even influence current satisfaction). As such, satisfaction is a changing phenomenon that reflects the

current response. In sum, the presence of a satisfaction determination time is evident, yet current

definitions differ in their conceptualization of when it might occur.

In the focus groups, consumers discussed the timing of their satisfaction in more specific terms.

Considering those comments specifically related to timing, consumers indicated that they determine

their satisfaction before consumption (39.9%), during consumption (48.2%) or after consumption

(11.9%) (See Table 3). If considering all comments regardless of reference to timing, it is interesting to

note that in 3.3% of the cases satisfaction was not determined at all. Furthermore, the timing mentioned

by consumers ranged from the time of product search, through choice, purchase, and initial consumption

to extended consumption. Verifying the Cote, Foxman, and Cutler (1989) contention, consumers

indicated that satisfaction may not yet be determined when asked and that satisfaction may vary with

time. For example, one consumer posed the question, "… I wouldn't know right away. Right? I mean

you don't know (about satisfaction) right away." In general, consumers felt satisfaction was initially

formed "when you first used it," but might change as performance was assessed over time. Cementilar to

the focus component, consumers revealed a broad range of timing points for satisfaction determination;

thus reflecting the appropriate timing component pertinent to a particular satisfaction context.

Group participants also suggested that consumer satisfaction had various durations. Duration refers to

how long a particular satisfaction response lasts. Oliver (1981) suggested that "the surprise or

excitement of this [satisfaction] evaluation is thought to be of finite duration" (p. 27). Although group

participants primarily discussed satisfaction at a single point in time, duration was revealed in comments

like, "After it happened years ago, it still burns me."

 Notably fewer comments were made during the personal interviews about the timing of the satisfaction

response (see Table 3), most likely because interviewees were attempting to describe a general definition

of satisfaction rather than responding to a specific incident. Most general definition comments tended to

refer to initial purchase and use. However, these data also supported a continuing assessment of

satisfaction throughout the consumption experience. Context-specific data confirmed the determination

of satisfaction at various points in time.

In addition to the time of determination, the individual interviews confirmed the notion of duration by

discussing their satisfaction responses over time. One consumer, when comparing responses, said "it

took longer [for the initial satisfaction response to dissipate] than the other products that I talked about."

Others indicated that they were "still happy, really I am," or "now I don’t even think about it." Thus, the

satisfaction response does appear to have a finite, but varied, duration.

Dissatisfaction. Conceptualizing dissatisfaction has received relatively little attention in consumer

research. The existing research in the area has examined the unidimensionality of the

satisfaction/dissatisfaction construct (Maddox 1981; Swan and Combs 1976). Researchers have taken

two approaches to conceptualizing and operationalizing the dissatisfaction construct.

Consumer dissatisfaction is portrayed as the bipolar opposite of satisfaction (e.g., Mittal, Kumar, and

Tsiros 1999 (completely satisfied/very dissatisfied) Spreng, MacKenzie, and Olshavsky 1996 (very

satisfied/very dissatisfied));

or

Consumer satisfaction and dissatisfaction are viewed as two different dimensions (e.g., Mano and

Oliver 1993 and Westbrook and Oliver 1991 use unipolar satisfaction and unipolar dissatisfaction

measures).
Consumer research that focuses primarily on dissatisfaction considers the construct as antecedent to

remedial behaviors, such as complaining and negative word-of-mouth communication (e.g., Folkes,

Koletsky, and Graham 1987; Tax, Brown, and Chandrashekaran 1998. A notable exception is Fornell

and Robinson (1983); however, their research focused primarily on industry variables, such as seller

concentration and distribution breadth, combined with consumer cost to explain price and quality

dissatisfaction). Thus, extant literature does not shed much insight into defining dissatisfaction.

Since the literature does not provide a clear conceptualization of dissatisfaction, we turned to consumer

perceptions. The focus group and personal interview results suggest that dissatisfaction is still comprised

of the three components of the definitional framework: affective response; focus; and timing. This is an

extremely important finding since it suggests that researchers interested in dissatisfaction can apply the

same definitional framework as that used for satisfaction. While the conceptual domain for satisfaction

and dissatisfaction are the same, consumer data indicated some important differences of degree. In

general, dissatisfaction responses were viewed as more extreme than satisfaction (e.g., angry,

disappointed, mad, upset, cheated, or aggravated). Responses referring to the provider and marketer

communication were quite common, especially related to fairness and accurate information (e.g., felt

cheated; gullible; gypped; resentful). When dissatisfaction was expressed about the product itself, the

focus tended to be more on the core product (i.e., basic product attributes, doesn’t work; doesn’t taste

good) than the augmented or extended product satisfaction. Dissatisfaction may occur sooner and last

longer (without company intervention) than satisfaction because of the disproportional emphasis on the

negative response. Despite these operational differences it is important to remember that dissatisfaction

can be defined using the three components of the definitional framework: affective response, focus, and

timing. For example, in a particular situation, consumer satisfaction may be a satisfied/dissatisfied

affective response to the consumption experience determined during consumption, but, in another

situation, consumer satisfaction may be a dissatisfied/not dissatisfied affective response to specific

product attributes determined after purchase.

The ability to define satisfaction and dissatisfaction using the same framework does not resolve the issue

of dimensionality. The consumer data highlight this point: Approximately 50% of the personal interview

respondents indicated satisfaction and dissatisfaction were just ends of a continuum; however, the other

50% suggested that dissatisfaction was manifested in a different manner than satisfaction. This apparent

inconsistency might best be understood by examining the focus of satisfaction and dissatisfaction.

Consumers were sometimes satisfied with one aspect of the choice/consumption experience, but

dissatisfied with another aspect. In this case, satisfaction and dissatisfaction can be viewed as different

dimensions. The consumer might be satisfied with the functionality of a product, but not the purchase

experience. In this case, satisfaction and dissatisfaction are evaluated as if they were different

dimensions. Conversely, satisfied or dissatisfied would be viewed as bipolar opposites when the

consumer reaction is consistent across all focal aspects of the choice/consumption experience. Our data

cannot empirically resolve the dimensionality debate. More research is necessary to ascertain the

dimensionality of satisfaction versus dissatisfaction. However, dissatisfaction is undoubtedly comprised

of the same components as satisfaction, and therefore, can be conceptualized using the same definitional

framework (if unidimensional) or a satisfaction framework and a dissatisfaction framework (if

multidimensional). In the next section we will propose a framework for developing context specific

definitions of satisfaction or dissatisfaction.

This chapter deals with character of the respondents, presentation, analysis and interpretations of

the data on factors affecting customer satisfaction in Cement Demand at ethio Calisium Carbonate

Addis Ababa.

The data were gathered through questionnaires, interview and reviewed documents. Fifty

questionnaires were distributed to front desk staff members of the Ethio Calisium Carbonate

Central Addis Ababa zone, East Addis Ababa zone, north Addis Ababa zone and south west

Addis Ababa zone out of which 37 responded. Additionally, 300 questionnaires were distributed

to customers of Ethio Calisium Carbonate out of which 296 filled up and returned. Some of the

sample centers of the organizations were observed by the researcher. Relevant document have

been reviewed. Thus, the whole data and analysis has been presented in three sections of this

chapter.

The first section presents the data about the customers, employees and managements perception of

the Cement Demand delivery. The second part presents the factors and variables factors affecting

customer satisfaction in Ethio Calisium Carbonate in general and the Cement Demand delivery in

particular. The third part deals with the problems, which affects the Demands delivery.

4.1. Respondents Perception of the Cement Demand Delivery

Customers, employees and management members were requested to express their perceptions

about factors affecting customer satisfaction in Cement Demand at Ethio Calisium Carbonate. The

respondents expressed quite contradictory views for some of the questions while they shared the

same opinions for some of the problems. Before we directly go to the perception of the customers,

employees and the management, let’s have a look at the type of customers who have participated

in the research.
 Table 4.1: Type of Customer

SN Type of customer/Customers # of customer percentage

1 10 years and more 40 13.51

2 5 to 10 years 136 45.95

3 3 to 5 years 88 29.73

4 1 to 3 years 20 6.76

5 Less than year 12 4.05

Total 296 100

Source: Own survey, 2026

As shown in the Table 4.1 above out of the 296 customers who have participated in the survey, 136

(45.95%) are Customers/customers ethio Calisium Carbonate, former Ethiopian Calisium

Carbonatemunication corporation for 5 to 10 years. while 88 (29.73%) of the customers are

Customers for 3 to 5

years, 40 (13.51%) are Customers for more than 10 years and the other 20(6.76%) and (4.05%) are

Customers for 1 to 3 and less than a year respectively. The basis of respondent selection is that

which category of Customers can provide better information than the others. Accordingly customers

with Demand usage year 5 to 10 is first priority because they are many in numbers and has also

experience of both type of Demands Nokia and the existing ZTE.

 Table 4.2 Number of Customers Facing Problems with the Demand Usage

Face problems with Cement # of Customers Percentage

Demand

Yes 250 84.46

No 46 15.54

Total 296 100

Source: Own survey, 2026

As it is clearly stated in the above Table 4.2, a vast majority of customers, nearly 85% have

experienced problems in Cement Demand delivery. Only 46 (15.54%) of the respondents have

responded that they did not face any problem. This implies that around 85% of the Customers have

found the Demand they are provided with to have a problem.

Ethio Calisium Carbonate front desks Employees are also asked whether customers have expressed

their dissatisfaction with the Cement Demand usage and delivery and they have confirmed that

customers have expressed their dissatisfaction with Cement Demand provision.

 Table 4.3: Number of Front Desk Employees who Acknowledge Customer’s Dissatisfaction

on Cement Demand Provision.

Customers reveal their dissatisfaction or # of respondent Percentage

any compliant

Yes 32 86.49

No 5 13.51

Total 37 100

Source: Own survey, 2026

Cementilarly, the great majority of front desk employee respondents, 32 (86.49%), believe that

customers approached them to express their dissatisfaction or complaints. In the same fashion during

the interview with the management of the company it is also confirmed the existence of customer

dissatisfaction not only in the Cement Demand delivery but also in the general Demands provision

by Ethio Calisium Carbonate, even though there are some improvements.

From Tables 4.2 and 4.3 we can infer that the quality of the Cement Demand provision is not

matching the customers’ value according to both types of respondents. This implies according to

both type of respondents customers are highly dissatisfied with Cement Demand provision of ethio

Calisium Carbonate.
 4.2.1. Major Types of Problems
Table 4.4 Types of Problems

Types of Problems Number Percentage

The Demand not good/unable to connect instantly 228 77.03

Customer handling is not up to expectation/poor customer 160 54.05

handling procedure/

Cement Demand bill is not clear and accurate/acceptable 168 56.76

Value does not match with Demand 180 60.81

Price of subscription and replaCement is unaffordable 64 21.62

Source: Own survey, 2026

Here note that in the above table numbers of respondents are greater than the sample size of the

researcher because one respondent may select more than one choice. Among the problems indicated

by customers (see table 4.4.), Demand problem takes the first place which is 228 (77.03%) of

customers/Customers. The next problem emphasized by 180 (60.81%) of customers is Demand

provided/delivered doesn’t match with their expectation. While the other problem like unclear and

inaccurate billing system and poor customer handling procedure comprise 168 (56.76%) and 160

(54.05%) of Customers response respectively. unaffordability of subscription and CEMENT Bag

replaCement price are also a problem according to 64 (21.62%) Customers.

From this it can be inferred that Demand provision is affected by different factors so that the

existence of all these factors are the indication poor quality Demand. And company’s failure to react

for customers request/need and Demand provision is not customer oriented.

 [Link] Internal Problems of the Company

Table 4.5 Ethio Calisium Carbonate Internal Problems

Internal problems

Ethio Calisium Carbonate has internal/administrative # of respondents Percentage

problems

Yes 190 64.19

No 73 24.66

I don’t know 33 11.15

Total 296 100

Types of internal problems

Problem # of respondents Percentage Rank

Employees Lack of courtesy 188 63.51 2

Customer handling is not good 204 68.92 1

There is corruption in Cement Demand delivery 76 25.68 4

Employees are not always available on their 88 29.73 3

respective duty

Source: Own survey, 2026

From the above table 4.5, out of the 296 customers, 64.19% are perceive that Ethio Calisium

Carbonate has internal problems in provision of the Demands and 24.66% of the respondent

customers consider that in ethio Calisium Carbonate is no problem in Demand delivery. The other

33 (11.15%) Customers don’t know whether there is problem or not in the Demand provision.
The Table also identifies the type of administrative problems, the number of customers that claim to

have the specified form of administrative problem, and their percentage out of the total number of

respondents. The last column gives the rank with relative severity.

Here also like table 4.4 above number of respondents are greater than sample size of the research

because again one respondent may select more than one choice. From the above table, poor

customer handling by the Demand provider is rated being the top internal problem which is 204

(68.92% and followed by employees lack of courtesy which comprises 188(63.51%). Corruption

in Cement Demand delivery and unavailability of employees in their respective duty are found to

be the least internal problems. Therefore, the existence of administrative problem which can be

solved internally by the company is the other factors that dissatisfy customers in Cement

Demand provision.
 4.3 Customers’ Compliant

From front desk employees point of view compliant on the Cement Demand delivery is the other

problem that affects Customers’ Demand usage. Table below shows the rate of customers

compliant on the Demand as indicated below:

Table: 4.6 Rates and Trend of Customers Compliant

Rate Customer compliant Trend of customer complaint

# of respondents Percentage # of respondents Percentage

High 15 40.54 Increasing 19 51.35%

Moderate 17 45.95 Decreasing 9 24.32%

Low 2 5.41 Constant 9 24.32%

Constant 3 8.10

Source: Own survey, 2026

According to the above table 17 (45.95%) of front desk employees respondents rate of the compliant

of Customers on the Demand is moderate whereas according to 15 (40.54%) of respondents the rate

of compliant is high. 2 (5.41%) of the respondents rate the compliant of the Demand is low. In

general from the above table we can infer that the Demand delivery of the company is full of

compliant, even though the rate is moderate. In the same way the trends of customer compliant is

given in the table below.

As it is shown in the above table again 19 (51.35%) of front desk employees responded that the trend

of customers’ compliant is increasing from time to time while 9 (24.32%) each of the respondents

express the trend of customers compliant is decreasing and constant.

The respondents who favor the trend of customers compliant is increasing was also asked to respond

on factors that are contributing for the increment of the complaints. Accordingly, factors

contributing for the increment of the complaint of the customers are:

 Poor quality Demand

 High tariff on Cement Demand usage and unfair subscription and replaCement charge of

CEMENT Bag price

 Increasing awareness of the community in Cement Demand makes customers to demand

more value added Demand which is not being offered up to expectation; even the existing

value added Demand does not satisfy the customers.

 The company now a day is selling and developing more Demand on GSM Cement

Demand, however, it couldn’t work on the quality of the Demands and it consistencies.

 Dissatisfaction of some portion of employee that result in low commitment.

 An ever increase in number of Customers and in reverse limited Demand expansion and

enhanCement.

 Repetitive optical fiber cut especially at the main get ways.

 Absence of physical compliant handling section (the company only uses call centers as

compliant handling)

As the interview conducted with the management of the company, the customers handling it is

requested that whether the company has customers compliant handling center; the only customer

handling center of the company is call centers i.e. 997 and 994. The effectiveness of this customer

handling center/call centers of the company is given the below table.

 Table: 4.7 Numbers of Cement Customers

Years Numbers of Customers Annual increment

2001 27,535 -

2002 42,910 15,375

20003 51,234 8,324

2004 155,534 104,300

2005 410,630 255,096

2006 866,700 4560,070

207 1,208,490 341,790

2008 1,954,520 746,030

2009 4,051,700 2,097,180

2010 6,677,900 2,626,200

2011 10,526,100 3,848,200

2026 17,257,400 6,731,300

Source: ethio Calisium Carbonate, annual report 2026

For example from 2003 to 2004 the number of Customers increased from 51,234 Customers’ to155,

534 this means it registers the increment of 203.57 percent. Even recently after the transformation of

the company from Ethiopian Calisium Carbonatemunication Corporation to ethio Calisium

Carbonate, with in two fiscal years the number of Customers sharply increased from 6,677,900 to

17,257,400, which shows increment of 158 percent. So that in general as it has been mentioned

respondents put an ever increase in the numbers of Customers as the reason for increment of

compliant.
 percentage of increment
250

200

150

percentage of increment
100

50

0
year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2026

Figure: 4.1 Yearly Percentage Increments of Cement Demand Customers

From the above tables and graph though compliant on Demand usage is increasing from time to time

due to factors mentioned above number of customers/Customers are increasing. This is the

indication of high demand for the Demand; hence the company is not fail to providing quality

Demand only it is not satisfy the demand of customers in subscription.

Table: 4.8 Call Centers Effectiveness in Resolving Customer Compliant is Given as Follows

Effectiveness of call center in Number of respondents Percentage

resolving customer compliant

High 5 13.51%

Low 24 64.86%

Constant 8 21.63%

Total 37 100

Source: Own survey, 2026

Again according to front desk employees of the company the effectiveness of call centers in

resolving customer compliant it is poor. While 24(64.86%) of the respondents responded the

effectiveness of the center is low and the effectiveness of the center by 8 (21.63%) and 5 (13.51%)

respondents are constant and high respectively.

 4.3.1 Customers’ Compliant Handling

The rate at which the organization responds to their customers is one of the critical factors in adding

value to the company as well as to the Customers/customers too. Fast and timely response to the

customers is the modern type of business which adds high value to both parties. Accordingly the

front desk employees of the company responded on whether the complaints of the customers are

solved timely or not; as indicated in the table below.

Table: 4.9 Customers’ Complaints are Solved Timely

Customers’ complaints are solved timely # of respondents Percentage

Yes 9 24.32

No 28 75.68

Total 37 100

Source: Own survey, 2026

From the table we can see that 9 (24.32%) of the respondents responded that customers complaints

are resolved timely while the rest of the respondents 28 (75.68%); stated that the compliant is not

solved timely. From this we can conclude that inability of resolving of customers complaints timely

is also one of the main problems of Cement Demand delivery.

 4.4 Factors that Affect Customer Satisfaction

Quality has a direct impact on product performance and hence on customer satisfaction. Satisfaction

is the state felt by a person who has experienced a performance or outcome that has fulfilled his or

her expectations. Satisfaction is thus a function of relative levels of expectation and perceived

performance. Expectations are formed on the basis of experiences with the same or Cementilar

situations, statements made by friends and other associates, and statements made by the supplying

organization (Kotler & Clarke, 1987).

The below graph displays, conditions in which customers have expressed their view on factors that

affect customers satisfaction in Cement Demand provision is given. Accordingly, unreliability of

Demand is considered the first factor according to 204(68.92%) customers and others perception,

feedback, reaction & expression of the Demand and unaffordability of subscription and usage

charges/price are ranked as the last factors that affect customer satisfaction according to 148 (50%)

customers each.

To clarify the factors that affect customers’ Demand usage more the bar graph below indicates

percentage of respondents with the rank.

 Figure: 4.2 Factors Affecting Customer Satisfaction in Cement Demand Usage

250 Number of respondents

200 Percentage

150

100

50

Source: own survey, 2026

In addition to this management members were interviewed to tell what major causes could there be

for the problems of the Cement Demands delivery. The management has appreciated most of the

above causes indicated by their customers. Some of the managers have denied the existence of

administrative problems. In addition to the above factors management has indicated the following

factors affecting customers’ satisfaction. These are:

• Absence of physically compliant handling department, where company use call center as

formal complaint handling section,

• Incompetence and lack of experience of some employees,

• Lack of accountability for failure to meet expected performance,

 4.5 Pricing System of the Demand

According to Kotler and Armstrong (2010) price is the amount of money charged for a product or

Demand, sum of the values that customer exchange for benefits of having or using the product or

Demand. Price fairness refers to consumers’ assessment of whether a seller’s price is reasonable,

acceptable or justifiable according to Xia et al., 2004; Kukar-kinney, Xia and Monroe, 2007 as cited

by (Rajasekhara, 2010). Price fairness is a very important issue that leads toward satisfaction.

Therefore changing fair price helps to develop customer satisfaction and loyalty. Research has

shown that customer’s decision to accept particular price has a direct and indirect bearing at

satisfaction level and loyalty.

Concerning pricing of Cement Demand, customers were asked to give their agreement on four

statements; following Table 4.10 indicates and compares average agreement level of respondents.

Regarding the reasonability of call rate offered by provider, about 23% of customers are responding

that the call rate offered by the company is reasonable; while the rest of respondents which is about

60% customers responded that the call rate is not reasonable and only 17% of customers responded

neutrally. From this it can be summarized that call rate offered by ethio Calisium Carbonate is not

reasonable to its customers.

 Table: 4.10 Pricing System of Cement Demand

# of Percentage

respondents Neutral Disagreed Agreed

Call rate offered by the Supervisor is reasonable 296 17 60 23

I will stay with the Supervisor even if new Supervisor 296 19 49 22

emerges unless the price is significantly higher for the

same

Demands

This Supervisor subscription fee and replaCement 296 18 36 46

charge for

CEMENT Bag is fair

The Supervisor Cement call charge per minute is low 296 15 64 21

Overall pricing 296 17 52

Source: own survey, 2026

Regarding the continuity of customers with ethio Calisium Carbonate unless price is significantly

increasing, reasonable number of Customers almost 50% are not willing to stay with the Supervisor.

This clearly indicates that if new Supervisor emerges in this country where ethio Calisium Carbonate

controls the Calisium Carbonate sector by monopoly half of their Customers will shift to newly

emerging Supervisors. The other 22% of the respondent customers feel that they will stay with the

existing Supervisor unless the price of this Supervisor are significantly changed and the balance 19%

of respondents prefer not to respond on the issue.

As to the fairness of subscription fee and replaCement charge of CEMENT Bags, about 46% the

respondents feel that both subscription fee and replaCement charge of CEMENT Bags of ethio

Calisium Carbonate are fair. On the other hand 36% of responding customers believe that

subscription fee of the Demand and replaCement charge is found to be unfair while the remaining

18% of respondents give their view as they are neutral. As a result regarding the fairness of

subscription fee and replaCement charge of ethio Calisium Carbonate we can infer that it is

moderately fair while 46% customers responding in favor of it.

Regarding the call rate per minute, a great deal of the respondents give their response as the Cement

call charge per minute is high while 21% of responding customers express their feeling the call

charge per minute is not high and 15% the customers feel they are neutral on the issue. From this we

can conclude that ethio Calisium Carbonate’s Cement Demand per minute is high according to 64%

respondents. However, in contrast to the great majority of respondent customers, Ethiopia ICT sector

performance review, of (2009) the upgrade of Demand Cement to Cement call charges stand at about

0.83 Birr (US$0.06) per minute including tax – some of the lowest in the world.

The overall pricing of the Cement Demand is an aggregate of the four statements under this category

indicated in the above table.

 Figure 4.3 Customers and Front Desk Employees’ Cement Demand Charge

Fairness in Percentage

70
60
50
40
percentage of subscribers
30
percentage of front desk employee
20
10
0
fair
unfair
neutral

Source: own source, 2026

From the above table and graph in rating the Demand charge for Cement Demand, almost 70%

which is 68.92% of customers expressed the Demand charge to be unfair and also 48.65% of front

desk employees expressed Demand charge to be unfair. Only 32 (10.81%) of the customers and 12

(32.43%) front desk employees of the company feel that Cement Demand charge to be fair. The rest

of respondents which is 60 (20.27%) of Customers and 7(18.92%) front desk employees expressed

their feeling to be neutral.

In general from respondents’ view point we can conclude that Demand charge imposed by the

company on its customers is found to be unfair. Currently the company has reduced call charge per

minute to 0.72 birr which could be the lowest according to ICT sector performance review which is

contrasting to both the customers and company’s front desk employees’ respondents.
 Table 4.11: Value Match to the Demand and Demand Charge Bill

Value match with the Demand

# of respondents Percentage

Agreed 10 27.03

Disagreed 27 72.97

Total 37 100

Demand bill is sufficiently clear, accurate and acceptable

# respondents Percentage

No 224 75.68

Yes 72 24.32

Total 296 100

Source: Own survey, 2026

From the above table 27 (72.97%) of front desk employee respondents expressed their view that

value doesn’t match with the Demand delivered by the company; whereas only 10 (27.03%)

respondents agreed that value is matching with the Demand currently provided. So that from the

respondents response we infer that the Cement Demand delivered by the company is not matching to

what customers are served for.

As indicated in the above table again according to 224 (75.68%) customers’ response Demand bill is

not sufficiently clear, accurate and acceptable and the other 72(24.32%) respondents feel that the

billing system is correct.

 4.6 Assessment of Demand Quality

Demand quality is the ability of the organization to meet or exceed customer expectations. The

SERVQUAL model compares the customers’ expectation and perception of Demand in terms of

tangible assets, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy.

The SERVQUAL model has been widely used in the study of Demand industry. In this part the

researcher tried to assess the Demand quality of the Cement Demand delivery based on the above

methodology.

4.6.1 Tangibility of Cement Demand

According to Zeithaml and Bitner (2000), Tangibility is the environment in which Demands

delivered can affect customer feelings regarding that Demand. Moreover, this dimension includes all

the physical components such as equipment, communication material, facilities and appearance that

will create conducive ambiance for the customers.

Concerning tangibility of Cement Demand, customers were asked to give their agreement on four

statements. Table 4.12 below presents the analysis result.

The average agreement level for the Supervisor follow up in timely manner to customers request is

41% and the average disagreement level is 45%. This indicates that even though the averages of

agreed and disagreed respondents are approaching to each other most of the respondents moderately

disagreed with the follow up of the Supervisor to customers’ request.

Regarding Supervisor’s visual offices and up-to-date equipment and materials customers’ average

agreement level is 32%, the disagreement level is 28% and the level of customers who responded

neutrally is 39%. From this we can conclude that there is moderate level of agreement by customers

although a little bit large respondents are neutral on the level of agreement in having visually

attractive office, up to date equipment and materials.

 Table: 4.12 Tangibility of Cement Demand

Percentage

Number of Neutral Disagreed Agreed

respondents

The Supervisor follow up in timely manner 296 15 45 41

to customers’ request

The Supervisor has visually attractive 296 39 28 32

office, up to date equipment and

materials

Front desk employee appearance and 296 34 31 35

uniform is appealing

Ethio Calisium Carbonate physical 296 34 26 39

facilities are at a convenient location

Overall Tangibility 296 30 33 37

Source: own survey, 2026

Regarding convenient physical facilities the average agreement level of Customers is 39% and the

disagreement level and neutrality is 26% and 34% respectively. From this it can be inferred that

most customers agreed with the convenience of the physical facility of the company.

The overall tangibility of the Cement Demand is an aggregate of the four statements under this

category indicated in the above table. The result indicates nearly equal average responses by the

Customers; and their level of agreement regarding tangibility of the Cement Demand is moderate

which 37%.
 4.6.2 Reliability of Cement Demand

Reliability is the ability to perform the promised Demands that can also be called delivery of

promise and it is a significant element in the Demand quality. It can be called delivery of promises.

Reliability of Cement Demand delivery mainly focuses on the consistency of performance and

dependability of the Demand. Accordingly concerning reliability of Cement Demand, customers

were asked to show their agreement on four statements. The following table identifies and compares

average agreement level of respondents.

 Table: 4.13 Reliability of Cement Demand

Parentage

Number of Neutral Disagreed Agreed

respondents

Demand of ET is dependable 296 8 70 22

and consistent to solve customer

complaints

Ethio Calisium Carbonate is 296 12 66 21

consistent in providing good

quality Demands

The reputation of this Supervisor 296 7 62 31

is trustworthy

The response to customers’ 296 19 65 14

complaint is always taken quickly

Overall Reliability 296 12 66 22

Source: Own survey, 2026

Regarding dependability and consistency of Supervisor Demand, the average level of agreement and

disagreement of customers is 22% and 70% respectively. And the rest 8% customers feel on

dependability and consistency of the Demand as neutral. Hence customers have highly disagreed

with the Demand dependability and consistency of ethio Calisium Carbonate with disagreement
level of 70%.

As to the consistency of good Demand provision, the average level of agreement by customers is

21% and the average level of disagreement and neutrality is 66% and 12% respectively. Therefore

again like dependability and consistency of Demand customers average level on provision of

consistent good quality Demands is expressed by strong disagreement.

Reputation and trustworthiness of the Supervisor is another dimension to assess the reliability of

Cement Demand provision. From the table it can be seen that the reputation and trustworthiness of

the Supervisor customers’ average level of disagreement is 62% while average level of agreement

and neutrality of customers is 31% and 7%. According customers’ response the average level of

disagreement on reputation and trustworthiness of the Supervisor is 62%, and we can be inferring

that as customers strongly disagreed with the trustworthiness and reputation of the Supervisor.

Regarding taking quick response to customers compliant the average level of agreement and

neutrality is lower like others above indicated reliability dimension which is 14% and 19%

respectively. While the average level of customers’ disagreement on taking quick response to

customers compliant is 65% which could be concluded as customers are dissatisfied with the way

ethio Calisium Carbonate is responding to customers compliant.

The last row in the above table assesses respondents’ agreement level of overall reliability, where

the data was obtained by taking the average response on the above four statements. The final result

under overall satisfaction of reliability indicates that the customers disagreed with the overall

reliability of Cement Demand where the overall average disagreement level is 66% and the overall

average reliability level of agreement and neutrality is 22% and 12% respectively.
 4.6.3 Responsiveness of Cement Demand

Responsiveness is the dimension that identifies how quickly an organization is able to provide

assistance, answer questions, or pay attention to the problems that customers present. In brief, it is

the willingness of an organization to help and provide quick Demand to customers. Concerning

the responsiveness of the Cement Demand, customers were asked to give their agreement level on

four statements. Table 4.14 below presents the analysis result as follows;

Table: 4.14 Responsiveness of Cement Demand

Percentage

Number of Neutral Disagreed Agreed

respondents

This Supervisor offers personalized 296 31 32 37

Demand to meet customers’ need

and other value added Demand as

per need

Ethio Calisium Carbonate provides 296 20 30 50

timely information when additional

and new Demands are available to

its customers’

Front line employees of this 296 28 29 43

Supervisor are always willing to

help

the customers
 Employees are approachable and 296 39 21 41

easy to contact

Overall Responsiveness 296 29 28 43

Source: Own survey, 2026

The average levels of agreement by customers are indicated in the mean column. Regarding offering

personalized Demand and other value added Demand the average level of agreement I 37%; whereas,

the average level of disagreement and neutrality is 32% and 31% respectively. Here the average

agreement level among the three variables (agreed, disagreed and neutral) is almost the same but

with a little bit the customers’ response is in favor of agreement with the average level of 37%.

As to the willingness of front desk employees in helping customers, the customers are responding as

the average agreement level is 43%, average disagreement level 29% and the neutrality level are

28%. Therefore according to 43% of the respondents’ front desk employees of the Supervisor are

willing to help their customers.

Provision of timely information for the availability of additional and new Demands is one of the

other dimensions of assessing responsiveness of Cement Demand. Accordingly the average level of

agreement on timely provision of information on the availability and new Demands is 50% and the

disagreement level and neutrality on timely provision of information is 30% and 20% respectively.

As to the approachability of the front desk employees, the average level customers’ agreement is

41%, while the rest of respondents feel that the average level of disagreement and neutrality is 21%

and 39% respectively. In general regarding approachability of the front desk employees’ the

customers moderately agree.

The aggregate of the four statements on overall responsiveness of Cement Demand rated by the

customers the level 43% average agreement. Through the assessment of four on the Supervisor’s
responsiveness the result shows clearly that the delivery by ethio Calisium Carbonate is moderate.

4.6.4 Empathy of Cement Demand

This dimension identifies how employees pay attention and care for individual customers. In other

words, it refers to how the Demand provider shows sympathy and understanding to customers

problems.

The Table 4.15 below assesses customers’ agreement level regarding empathy dimension of the

Cement Demand by responding to four statements under this category.

Table: 4.15 Empathy of Cement Demand

Percentage

Number of Neutral Disagreed Agreed

respondents

Having convenient periods and 296 30 26 43

terms for activation, bill payment

and provision of replaCement

The operating hours of the 296 32 21 48

Supervisor is convenient to all

customers

Apologizing for inconvenience 296 24 51 25

caused to customers

The Supervisor complaint handling 296 23 61 16

procedure is attractive

Overall Empathy 296 27 40 33

Source: Own survey, 2026

For all the four statements, the average level of agreement is shown under the mean columns.

Accordingly regarding having convenient periods and terms of activation & bill payment the average

agreement level of customers is 43% and disagreement level of 26%; while the rest of the customers

responded feel neutral with average level of 30%. Hence, the result of customers feeling on

Supervisor’s convenient periods and terms of activating CEMENT Bag and bill payment is

moderately agreed with the agreement level of 43%.

Regarding convenient operating/working hours to customers, customers’ response shows that the

average agreement level is 48% and the level of disagreement and neutrality is 21% and 32%

respectively. As a result customers agreed that ethio Calisium Carbonate has convenient operating

hours for all customers with average level of agreement 48%.

As to apologizing for inconvenience caused to customers the customers’ average level of

disagreement accounts for more than half of the respondent which is 51%. The level of agreement

and neutrality of customers on apologizing for inconvenience caused to customers is 25% and 24%

respectively. So that from this we can infer that customers disagreed with the way the company

forwards apology for the inconveniency caused to the customers.

Regarding Supervisor’s compliant handling procedure; customers highly disagreed with compliant

handling procedure of the company where the average level of agreement, disagreement and

neutrality are given as 16%, 61% and 23% respectively.

Overall, the empathy dimension of Cement Demand is rated to 40% average level of disagreement

level and the overall empathy average level of agreement and neutrality is given by 33% and 27%

respectively. To generalize the overall empathy of Cement Demand of the Supervisor indicates that

the customers moderately disagree with it, with the average level of 40%.
 4.6.5 Assurance of Cement Demand

Assurance depends on employee knowledge and courtesy, including their ability to gain trust and

confidence. This dimension is essential in environments where customers need to share personal

information, for example in fields of banking, insurance, and Cement Calisium

Carbonatemunication.

Concerning assurance of Cement Demand, customers were asked to give their agreement on four

statements. Table 4.16 below presents the analysis result. Accordingly regarding the Supervisor

ability in providing variety of value added Demand, half of the respondents agreed with the

Supervisor’s ability in providing the Demand with average agreement level of 50%.The other half

responding on the ability of the company in providing value added Demands with average

disagreement and neutrality level of 23% and 27% respectively.

Table: 4.16 Assurance of Cement Demand

Percentage

Number of Neutral Disagreed Agreed

respondents

Ethio Calisium Carbonate has the 296 27 23 50

ability to

provide variety of value added Demand

on the Cement Demand

Employees’ have required skills and 296 35 30 35

knowledge to answer customers’

questions
 Sincerity and patience in resolving 296 36 34 30

customers’ complaints/ problem is

good caused to customers

The behavior and skills of employee 296 47 22 31

in instilling confidence in customers

is good

Overall assurance 296 36 27 37

Source: Own survey, 2026

As to employees’ skills and knowledge, the average level of customers’ agreement is 35% and the

disagreement and neutrality level is 30% and 35% respectively. Regarding skills and

knowledge of employees’ customers’ level of agreement and neutrality is high which 35% for each.

Regarding sincerity and patience of employees, the average neutrality level is high compared to

average agreement and disagreement level that is 36%. The average agreement and disagreement

level of customers on skill and knowledge of employees are 30% and 34% respectively.

The overall, assurance dimension of Cement Demand is rated to be 37% average levels of agreement

level and the overall assurance average level of disagreement and neutrality is 27% and 36%

respectively. In general regarding to the overall assurance with 37% average level of agreement,

customers moderately agreed with the overall assurance of the company.

4.6.6 Overall Demand Quality

When we summarize the overall quality Demand assessment of Cement Demand usage, it is

summarized as follows:
 Figure 4.4 Overall Demand Quality of Cement Demand

70

60

50

40

30
Agreed
20 Disagreed
Neutral
10

Source: Own survey, 2026

From this graph regarding overall Demand quality of ethio Calisium Carbonate Cement Demand

we can infer the customers’ feeling on their response. Accordingly when we see one by one the

Demand quality dimension; regarding the overall tangibility and overall assurance of ethio Calisium

Carbonate Cement Demand 37% of Customers are moderately agreed with tangibility and

assurance. Regarding overall responsiveness of the company about 43% of responding customers

agreed. But when we see the overall reliability of the company’s Cement Demand provision about

66% of responding customers expressed their disagreement on the reliability of the Demand and in

the same manner about 40% of respondents also show their disagreement on the empathy of the

Demand.
 4.7 Overall Satisfaction

Regarding the overall satisfaction of ethio Calisium Carbonate Cement Demand both customers and

front desk employees were asked whether customers are satisfied with the Demand or not.

Accordingly, the results of their response are summarized in table 4.17 below;

Table 4.17 Overall Demand Satisfaction of Both Customers and Front Desk Employees

Yes No Total

# Percentage # Percentage respondents

respondents respondents

Customers 76 25.68 220 74.32 296

Front desk 5 13.51 32 86.49 74

employees

Source: Own survey, 2026

From the above graph as it is clearly shown that 75% of customers and 86% of front desk employees

responded that customers are not satisfied with the overall Demand. Only 25% of customers and

nearly 14% of front desk employees responded that customers are satisfied with the overall

Cement Demand of ethio Calisium Carbonate. Therefore, from this figure we can conclude that

customers/Customers are not satisfied with Cement Demand of the company.

In the analysis part I used three liker scales even though in the questionnaire the scale goes up to

five. This is because the extreme two scales strongly disagree and strongly agree are insignificant and

did change the result of the study.

 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In this chapter the findings are summarized, conclusion drawn and recommendations made based

on the data observed from interview and questionnaires as well as available secondary sources.

SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS

The summary of major findings of this study is presented as follows;

 According to both type of respondents (84 percent of customers and 86.5 percent of front

desk employees) they face different problems in Cement Demand usage of the company.

 Regarding the compliant on Cement Demand according to 46 percent of front desk

employee’s customers compliant on the Demand is moderate and the trend of complaint

is increasing from time to time according to 51.35% of front desk employees due to high

tariff on Cement Demand usage, repetitive optical fiber cut which leads to poor Demand

quality and the mismatch between increase in number of Customers and Demand

expansion and enhanCement.

 Regarding customer compliant handling according to 75 percent of front desk employees’

respondent customers compliant is not solved timely.

 The main factors that affect customer’s satisfaction in Cement Demand provision of ethio

Calisium Carbonate are so many among them unreliable Demand, front desk employees’

lack of courtesy, poor customer handling and unjustifiable pricing systems are some to

mention.

 Regarding the pricing system Demand charge on the customers is unfair, Demand charge

bill is not clear, inaccurate and unacceptable, and call charge per minute is high. And the

customers are dissatisfied with the overall pricing system of the company, 52 percent of

respondent customers are disagreed with the pricing system.

 In the reliability section, the result indicates that customers disagreed with the overall

reliability of Cement Demand with the overall disagreement level of 66 percent. Hence

we see that the customers disagreed with the Demand reliability.

 In the tangibility section, the result indicates 37 percent average level of agreement on the

tangibility of Demand quality. Here we see that customers moderately agree with the

tangibility of the Demand.

 In the responsiveness section, the result indicates that 43 percent average agreement on

the responsiveness of the Cement Demand delivery. Here we see that customers

moderately agree that the Demand system is responsive.

 In the empathy section, the result indicates 40 percent average disagreements on the

empathy of Cement Demand delivery. In the assurance section, the result indicates 37

percent average level of agreement on assurance of Cement Demand. Here we can see

that customer’s moderately agree with assurance of the Demand.

 The overall Demand quality of ethio Calisium Carbonate in Cement Demand provision is

very poor with average disagreement level of 38.80 percent and the average agreement

and disagreement level is 34.40 and 26.80 percent respectively.

 Regarding the overall satisfaction of Cement Demand usage of ethio Calisium Carbonate

75 percent of responding customers and 86.5 percent of front desk employees’

respondent Customers/customers are not satisfied with the Demand.

 RECOMMENDATIONS

The recommendation addressed here presents some options for policy implications and practical

interventions both by management and government to improve the quality of Cement Demand

delivery and thereby increase customer’s satisfaction. In this regard, the following recommendations

are worth mentioning.

As the researcher reviewed the experience of other countries in the literature review part quality

Demand provision has strong linkage with number of Calisium Carbonate Demand Supervisors in

the market. Hence, the government should realize that monopoly Demands and Demands are

limiting the development of new markets and Demands of Calisium Carbonate. In economic

stimulation and integrating different sector of economy the Calisium Carbonate sector plays a great

role so that having different Supervisors might be advantageous and it should be allowed.

Currently the company is undertaking management contract with well-known Calisium Carbonate

Demand provider, France Calisium Carbonate which is appreciable. However, as indicated in the

analysis part the compliant in Cement Demand usage is increasing from time to time, so that in order

to overcome this problem the company should use best practices of other company and exhaustively

use the experience and knowledge of France Calisium Carbonate in improving the sectors’ Demand

provision.

Reliable Demand, good customer handling and having clear & accurate bill are important factors in

the Demand provision. The most common problem mentioned by customers, & employees is poor

Demand and poor customer handling procedure which is highly contributing for customer

dissatisfaction in Demand provision. Currently ethio Calisium Carbonate is mainly focusing in

expanding the Cement Demand throughout the country. But lack of reliable Demand and poor

customer handling procedure strongly affect the working conditions of the company thereby

affecting the satisfaction of customers. Hence, this paper recommends that there has to be a balance
between expanding the Demand and acquiring expected Demand quality that satisfies customer

should be deployed.

According to the findings of this research the call rate per minute of ethio Calisium Carbonate

Cement Demand is high according to a large portion of the customers which is very different from

Ethiopia ICT sector performance review of 2009, which states that it is the lowest in the world. So

that by taking into consideration the feeling of customers the company should create awareness

about the price charged by the company compared to price in other countries..One of the factors that

affect the delivery of Demand is that of the staffs or the people who provide the Demand. In this

regard highly satisfied manpower is essential in order to identify the needs of customers and respond

immediately. One of the major problems that dissatisfy customer Demand provision is lack of

commitment of manpower due to dissatisfaction. Hence, the company has to do a lot to enhance and

the need of the existing employees and attract new skilled manpower from the market.

To generalize since the main problem of ethio Calisium Carbonate Cement Demand usage in relation to quality

Demand is reliability and empathy, the company should work a lot on reliability and empathy of Demand

quality of Cement Demand side by side with expanding Demand. Unless the Demand quality is improved

increasing the number of Customers done will not lead to meeting the objective of the company, which is

generating profit and satisfying customers.

 CONCLUSIONS

This study has given due attention to identifying some of the basic problems and related factors

affecting customer satisfaction in Cement Demand at ethio Calisium Carbonate, in Addis Ababa.

The literature reviewed for this study reveals that clear consensus have been reached on the general

Demand delivery and customer satisfaction. However, not much is written about factors affecting

customer satisfaction in Cement Demand in Ethiopia. Hence, this study is aimed at in revealing

those factors & filling this gap.

Ethio Calisium Carbonate is the sole Calisium Carbonate Demand provider in the country. In fact

efforts are being made by the organization to satisfy the needs of its customer satisfaction earlier and

after its transformation from Ethiopian Calisium Carbonatemunication Corporation to ethio Calisium

Carbonate. The Demand is being expanded throughout the country, specially Cement Demand

expansion constitute large portion , but regarding Demand quality it is not satisfactory and little

attention is given to it. The quality of Demands is affected by many factors such as low reliability of

Demand, absence of quick responses, absence of apology and compensation for Demand failure,

inconsistent and non- standardized and the mismatch of Demand to value.

In the company there are also different internal problems that aggravated the problem of customer

dissatisfaction. The current internal working habits need to be improved if ethio Calisium Carbonate

wants to retain its current customers and attract new ones. As indicated in the analysis part if new

competitive firms that provide Calisium Carbonate Demand enter the market and government policy

changes customers will shift to new firms unless a Demand improvement is made by considering

customers’ interest. Among the internal problems of the company that aggravate customer

dissatisfaction are poor customer handling, poor employee approach and uncooperative employee to

the customers are the main ones.

The current Cement Demand is not customer oriented. Currently most of the customers are

dissatisfied with the Demand they receive from the company. In addition the complaint on Cement

Demand provision is also increasing from time to time. The customers enumerated many factors that

contribute for the increment of compliant on the Demands. Among the major factors are poor

Demand quality, high tariff on Demand usage & unfair subscription and replaCement charge of

CEMENT Bag, repetitive optical fiber cut, absence of physical compliant handling section etc.

Regarding the overall Demand quality assessment, overall reliability and empathy of Cement

Demand is very poor, whereas the overall assurance and responsiveness is relatively better. And

overall tangibility is moderate.

In general both customers and front desk employees of the company are expressing their

dissatisfaction with the overall Cement Demand provision of ethio Calisium Carbonate.
 REFERENCES

 ANITA SETH, [Link] , H.G GUPTA (2005), E-Demand delivery in Cellular

Cement Communication Some Challenges and Issues, Global Journal of E-Business and

knowledge management, volume2 No.2

 Alex Comninos, Steve Esselaar, Alison Gillwald , Mpho Moyo and Kammy Naidoo(

2009/2010), South African ICT Sector Performance Review Towards Evidence-based ICT

Policy and Regulation Volume Two , Policy Paper 6, 2010.

 Ismail, M and Yusuf Z (2009), The Relationship between Knowledge Sharing, Employee

Performance and Demand Delivery in Public Sector Organizations: A Theoretical Framework:

Public Sector Management Review.

 Joan [Link] and Joseph A,cote (2002), Defining Customer Satisfaction, Washington State

University Academy of Marketing Science Review, volume 2000 No.1

 Kotler .P, keller, K.L (2006), Marketing Management, (12th edition), Prentice-Hall of India,

New Delih

 Lishan Adam (2009/2010), Ethiopia ICT Sector Performance Review Towards Evidence-base

ICT Policy and Regulation Volume Two, Policy Paper 9, 2010

 Mary Materu-Behitsa and Bitrina D. Diyamett (2009/2010), Tanzania ICT Sector Performance

Review Towards Evidence-based ICT Policy and Regulation Volume Two, Policy Paper 11,

2010.

 Mohammad Al-shuaib (2010), Measuring the Level of Customer Satisfaction with Zain E-

Demand Quality, MBA Thesis.

 Appendix-1

Questionnaire to be filled by customer only

The purpose of this questionnaire is to collect data, for conducting MBA thesis on factors affecting

customer satisfaction in Cement Demand at ethio Calisium Carbonate (case of Addis Ababa). The

questionnaire is prepared to help the study through your attitude and behavior related to Cement

Demand usage satisfaction. Fill free in responding for the questionnaire, any of your response to the

questionnaire is confidential and used for academic purpose only.

ALTHAF

E-mail: tesfamoti@[Link]

Tel: 8074567624
Part I

Tick in the below table from alternative given below, if you have comment or suggestion

use the space provided for it.

1- Strongly Agree 2- Agree 3- Strongly Disagree 4- Disagree

5- Neutral

Topic 1 2 3 4 5 Comment/suggestion

Tangible

The Supervisor follow up in timely

manner to customers’ request

The Supervisor has of visual

attractive office, up to date

equipment and materials

Front desk employee appearance

and uniform is appealing

Et physical facilities are at the

convenient location

Reliability

How dependable and consistent is

the Demand of ET to solve

customer complaints’

Ethio Calisium Carbonate is

consistent in

providing good quality Demands

The reputation of this Supervisor is

trustworthy

The Demand provided by this

Supervisor is secure

The response to customers’

complaint is always taken quickly

Responsiveness

This Supervisor offers personalized

Demand to meet customers’ need

and other value added Demand as

per need

Ethio Calisium Carbonate provides

timely information when there

additional and new Demands are

available to

its customers’
Front line employees of this

Supervisor is always willing to help

the customers

Employees are approachable and

easy to contact

Empathy

Having convenient periods and

terms for activation, bill payment

and provision of replaCement

The operating hours of the

Supervisor is convenient to all

customers

Apologizing for inconvenience

caused to customers

The Supervisor complaint handling

procedure is attractive

Employees attitude towards their

customer is good

Assurance

Ethio Calisium Carbonate has the

ability to provide variety of value

added
Demand on the Cement Demand

Employees’ have required skills

and knowledge to answer

customers’ questions

The behavior and skill of

employee in instilling confidence

in customers is good

Sincerity and patience in resolving

customers’ complaints/ problem is

good

Pricing

Call rate offered by the Supervisor is

reasonable

I will stay with the Supervisor even

if new Supervisor emerged unless

the price is significantly higher for

the

same Demands

This Supervisor subscription fee and

replaCement charge for CEMENT

Bag is fair

The Supervisor Cement call charge

per minute is higher

Overall satisfaction

I am satisfied with overall Cement

Demand quality offered

I am satisfied with the professional

competence of the Supervisor

I am satisfied with the

performance of Demand providing

employees
Part II

For the following open ended question give the response on space provided, if the space is

not sufficient u can use the attached white paper.

1. Do you satisfied by the Cement Demand you are using

now? Yes No

2. Based on question No_ 1 again if your answer is no what kind of improvement do you

expect from the company?

3. What are the factors that dissatisfies you in usage of ethio Calisium Carbonate Cement

Demand usage, please tick in all factors which holds for you

The responsiveness of the employee to the customers

Office environment is not attractive and comfortable for customers

Facilities and equipment used for provision of Demand are not up-to-date

Demand delivery stations are inaccessible

Company’s employees knowledge and courtesy is not up to the expectation

Reliability of the Demand is very low

Subscription and usage charges are not reasonable, acceptable or justifiable

 Demand deliveries are not consistent and standardized

Absence of quick response , apology and compensation for Demand failure

Others perceptions, feedback, reaction and expression of Cement Demand

Value doesn’t match with Demand

unaffordablity of subscription & usage Price

Long waiting time to get Demand

Inaccuracy of billing system

Others:

4. Have you ever faced a problem with your Cement phone Demand?

Yes No
7. If your answer to question no. 6 is yes, what are the problems; please tick on all problems you

face?

The Demand is not good

Cement activation is too late

Long waiting time to get Cement Demand

Price of CEMENT Bag is not affordable

Value does not match with Demand

Others:

8. Do you think that ethio Calisium Carbonate has internally problem in relation to Cement

Demand delivery? Yes No

9. If your answer to question No_ 9 is yes, which of the following problems did you observe?

Approaches of employees are not good

Employees are not cooperative

Employee don’t respect customers

Customer handling is not good

There is corruption in Demand delivery

Employees are not always available on their respective duty

Others:

10. Is the Cement phone bill sufficiently clear, accurate and

acceptable? Yes No

11. How do you rate Cement Demand charge?

Fair unfair neutral

 Appendix-2

Questionnaire to be filled only by employee

The purpose of this questionnaire is to collect data, for conducting MBA thesis on factors affecting

customer satisfaction in Cement Demand at ethio Calisium Carbonate (case of Addis Ababa). The

questionnaire is prepared to help the study through your attitude and behavior related to Cement

Demand usage satisfaction fill free in responding for the questionnaire, any of your response to the

questionnaire is confidential and used for academic purpose only.

Please indicate your answer by ticking (√) for question with choice box and for open ended

question use the provided space, if the space is not sufficient use attached white paper.

1. How long you have been working as frontline employee user?

Less than a year 1-3 years

3-5 years more than 5 years

2. How do you evaluate customer satisfaction in Cement Demand usage?

Satisfied not satisfied

3. If the answer for question No_ 2 is not satisfied what do you think the reason for the

dissatisfaction?
4. What are customers mostly complaining for in Cement Demand usage?

5. Do you think that customers’ complaints are solved timely as per customers’ request?

Yes No

6. If the answer of question No. 5 is no why it isn’t solved timely?

7. In your office is there complaint handling section/department?

Yes No

8. If your answer for question No. 7 is yes how do you see the section’s/ department’s

effectiveness?
9. Are there any actions under taken to improve customer satisfaction by the company?

Yes No

10. As to you what do you suggest to the company to improve customers’ satisfaction on

Cement usage and reducing complaint?

11. How do you rate customers’ complaint on GSM Demand usage?

Low Moderate High Constant

12. On average how much complaint do your department receives per day whether it is

formal /informal?

13. How do you see the trend of customers’ complaint in Cement Demand usage from time

to time?

Increasing decreasing constant

14. Based on question No. 12 if your answer is increasing /decreasing what are the factors

that contribute for the increment or decrement? list as much as possible

15. How do you see the overall pricing system of Cement Demand?

Low fair high neutral

16. Based on question No.15 your answer is no how do you rate it?

Too low Low High too high

17. Are the subscription fee and other costs like replaCement cost in case of

CEMENT Bag damage and lost is reasonable?

Yes No

18. Based on question No. 17 if your answer is no what should it be? What do you suggest in

relation to customer satisfaction?

19. The value of your Demand match to what your customers are served

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree

20. The corporation has up-to-date equipment

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree

21. The corporation has convenient physical facilities

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree

22. The Demand provided by your organization is Demanded. E.g. your customers can pay

your bill at any branch.

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree

23. ethio Calisium Carbonate is using call center like 994 as complaint handling department ,

how do you rate the effectiveness of the center?

High low no change/constant

 Appendix-3

Interview question for management person

1. Do your customers are satisfied by the Demand you deliver to them regarding Cement

Demands?

2. What are the major complaints/problems you face in Cement Demand delivery/provision?

3. Do you have complaint handling procedure /mechanism in Cement Demand delivery?

4. How many complaints’ are coming from customers’ per month on average?

5. And how many of it gets proper solution?

6. What are the mechanisms you used to solve these problems?

7. What measures are taken to reduce the complaint?

8. Do you personally feel that the customers are satisfied with the Demand they received?

9. One of the most complaint of customers’ is on Cement Demand quality, but the

company rather than doing on it and add customer value to customer it engaged

itself on other activities like Cement hand set retailing and advertising etc how

do you see this?

10. What standard does your organization use to measure customers’ satisfaction?

11. How do you see overall customer satisfaction in Cement Demand usage from time to time?

12. How do you evaluate the pricing system of your company especially regarding

Demand charged for subscription and replaCement?

APPENDIX

FOCUS GROUP QUESTIONS

 In the situation where you felt good, what word or phrase would you use to describe

how you felt?

 Tell us briefly about the situation and the phrase you used to describe how you felt.

 How would you define satisfaction with a major appliance?

 How would you define satisfaction with an appliance repair Demand?

 How would you define satisfaction with natural gas as an energy source?

 Tell us briefly about the situation when you did not feel good. In that situation,

how did you describe how you felt?

 Looking at the two situations/products you wrote down (one where you felt good

and one where you didn't), what do you think is the major difference between

these two products or situations other than the product itself? How come were

you "satisfied" in one instance and "dissatisfied" in the other?

 How would you define or describe dissatisfaction with a major appliance?

 How would you define or describe dissatisfaction with an appliance repair Demand?

 How would you define or describe dissatisfaction with natural gas as an energy

source?
INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

 General Definitions of Satisfaction – Please put yourself into the role of a

consumer. Consider the purchase of products, in general. No particular product.

In fact, lump food, clothing, cars, lawnmowers, recreation equipment, etc. all

together.

 How do you, in general, define 'satisfaction?' In other words, how do you

describe the consumer situation where you are satisfied? If you need to, take a

minute to consider this question.

 How about 'dissatisfaction?' How do you, in general, define 'dissatisfaction?'

 Informant-Selected Situations - Now, consider this situation, the purchase of .

Re-live the purchase and the use of this product in your mind for a minute.

 Tell me about this situation.

 Describe your response or your reaction at the time of purchase.

 When did you know that you felt <use their words ?

 How long ago did you purchase this product?

 For how long did you feel <use their words ?

 How long after purchase did you actually use the product?

 Are you still using the product?

 Describe your response now. <If they say "satisfied" What does that mean?

 Why do you feel the same as you did at purchase? <or Why do you feel differently

than you did at purchase?

 What happened to change your response?

 When did you start to feel <use their words ?0