A STUDY ON CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

ON GOOGLE PAY AND PHONE PE

FROM
OSMANIA
UNIVERSITY
HYDERABAD

Student-1 Name: [Link] Hall ticket No: 101022405033

Student-2 Name: [Link] Hall ticket No: 101022405038
Student-3 Name: [Link] Hall ticket No: 101022405040
Student-4 Name: [Link] Hall ticket No: 101022405041

UNDER GUIDANCE OF
[Link] Prasad Sir

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

University Post Graduate College (OU)

Secunderabad
( A Constituent College OU)
 UNIVERSITY POST GRADUATIONS
COLLEGE (OU)

(UNDER THE CONSTITUENCY OF OSMANIA UNIVERSITY)

CERTIFICATE
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT

Name: [Link] Hall ticket No:

101022405033 Name: [Link] Hall
ticket No: 101022405038 Name: [Link]
Hall ticket No: 101022405040
Name: [Link] Hall ticket No: 101022405041

ARE BONAFIED STUDENTS OF THE COLLEGE THEY HAVE WORKED ON PROJECETED

“A STUDY ON CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ON GOOGLE PAY AND PHONE PE” UNDER
THE SUPERVISION OF “[Link] PRASAD SIR” DURING THE YEAR OF “2024-
2025”.

PRINCIPAL VICE PRINCIPAL EXTERNAL EXAMINER

PARADISE, SECUNDERABAD, HYDERABAD-500003

Phone:- 04027902169,
E-mail:- oupgcs@[Link]
 DECLARATION
We hereby declare that this project report entitled “A Study On Employee Grievance
Handling Procedure In Brite Brothers Limited” is submitted by us to the Department of
Commerce, Osmania University, Hyderabad, is a bonafide work undertaken by us and is not
submitted to any other university or Institution for the award of any degree/ diploma/
certificate.

Date:
Place:- Secunderabad

Siganture of the student

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to thank the people who extended their immense help to complete my
project work tiled “A STUDY ON CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ON GOOGLE PAY AND
PHONE PE ”

We would like to express our sincere gratitude to the Prinicapl

[Link] and Vice principal Dr.T Sridhar for giving us the
opportunity to do the project. We would also like to thank our Guide and
lecturer in Bachelors of Commerce
[Link] Prasad Sir for guiding us through the project work and helping
us our with his valuable suggestions for this project work.

We are also thankful to our college library staff, who directly or indirectly
have been helpful in some or the other way. Finally, our sincere thanks to our
family and friends for giving us time, support and encouragement, without
whose co- operation our study would have been incomplete.

Thank you.

Name: [Link] Hall ticket No: 101022405033

Name: [Link] Hall ticket No:
101022405038 Name: [Link] Hall ticket No:
101022405040 Name: [Link] Hall ticket
No: 101022405041
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

[Link] CHAPTER PAGE NO

1 LIST OF TABLES

2 LIST OF FIGURES

3 INTRODUCTION

4 REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND THEROTICAL

FRAMEWORK

5 DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

6 FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND

SUGGESTIONS
7 BIBLIOGRAPHY

8 APPENDIX-QUESTIONNARIES

i
 LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TABLE NAME PAGE

NO NO

3.1 Age category that use Online Payment

3.2 Statistics of Online Payment on the basis of Gender

3.3 Statistics of Online Payment on the basis of Occupation

3.4 Statistics of respondents using Online Payment

3.5 Statistics of respondents not using online payment

3.6 Respondents whose phone support the app

3.7 Most preferred online payment app

3.8 Respondents usage of online payment app

3.9 Satisfaction of respondents towards Google Pay

3.10 Satisfaction of respondents towards Phone Pe

3.11 Usage of Online Payment by respondents

3.12 Respondents preferred app for transferring money among peers

3.13 Online payment app that provide more payment option

3.14 Immediate responds to customer queries

3.15 Cost and Time effective payment app

3.16 App which does not need much legal formalities

3.17 Promotional offers provided by Google Pay and Phone Pe

3.18 Cash loss of respondents

3.19 Security of Online Banking Services

ii
3.20 Quality of Google Pay

3.21 Quality of Phone Pe

3.22 Most preferred app

3.23 Google Pay Services

3.24 Phone Pe Services

3.25 Most preferred app

3.26 Rating of Google Pay

3.27 Rating of Phone Pe

iii
 LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE FIGURE NAME PAGE

NO NO

3.1 Age category that use Online Payment

3.2 Statistics of Online Payment on the basis of Gender

3.3 Statistics of Online Payment on the basis of Occupation

3.4 Statistics of respondents using Online Payment

3.5 Statistics of respondents not using online payment

3.6 Respondents whose phone support the app

3.7 Most preferred online payment app

3.8 Respondents usage of online payment app

3.9 Satisfaction of respondents towards Google Pay

3.10 Satisfaction of respondents towards Phone Pe

3.11 Usage of Online Payment by respondents

3.12 Respondents preferred app for transferring money among peers

3.13 Online payment app that provide more payment option

3.14 Immediate responds to customer queries

3.15 Cost and Time effective payment app

3.16 App which does not need much legal formalities

3.17 Promotional offers provided by Google Pay and Phone Pe

iv
3.18 Cash loss of respondents

3.19 Security of Online Banking Services

3.20 Quality of Google Pay

3.21 Quality of Phone Pe

3.22 Most preferred app

3.23 Google Pay Services

3.24 Phone Pe Services

3.25 Most preferred app

3.26 Rating of Google Pay

3.27 Rating of Phone Pe

v
 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

1
1.1 INTRODUCTION

Google Pay is a digital wallet platform and online payment system developed by Google to
power-in-app and tap-to-pay purchases on mobile devices, enabling users to make
payments
with Android phones, tablets or watches. It took over the branding of google chromes autofill
feature. Google pay adopts the features of both android pay and google wallet through its
instore, peer-to-peer and online payment services. Google pay uses Near Field
Communication (NFC)to transmit card information facilitating funds transfer to the retailer. It
replaces the credit or debit card chip and pin or magnetic stripe transaction at point-ofsale
terminals by allowing the user to upload these in the Google Pay wallet. It is similar to
contactless payments already used in many countries, with the addition of two-factor
authentication. The service lets and android devices wirelessly communicate with point of
sale systems using a near field communication (NFC) antenna, host-based card emulation
(HCE), and android’s security.

Google Pay takes advantage of physical authentications such as fingerprint ID where available.
On devices without finger print ID, Google pay is activated with a passcode. When the user
makes a payment to a merchant, Google Pay does not send the credit or debit number with the
payment. Instead it generates a virtual account number representing the users account
information. This service keeps customer payment information private, sending a one-time
security code instead of the card or user details. PhonePe is an Indian e-commerce payment
system and digital wallet company headquartered in Bangalore, India. It was founded in
December 2015, by Sameer Nigam, Rahul Chari and Burz in Engineer.

PhonePe app went live in August 2016 and was the first payment app built on Unified
Payments Interface (UPI). The PhonePe app is available in over 11 Indian languages. Using
PhonePe, users can send and receive money, recharge mobile, data cards, make utility
payments, buy gold and shop online and offline. In addition PhonePe also allows users to book
Ola ride, pay for Redbus tickets, order food on freshmenu, eat, fit and avail Goibibo Flight and
Hotel services through microapps on its platform

1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1. To understand the concept of Google, Pay and PhonePe.

2. To analyze the satisfaction of customers in the usage of Google Pay and PhonePe.
3. To determine the various facilities provided by Google pay and PhonePe.
4. To study the effectiveness of the promotional activities taken by Google Pay and PhonePe.
5. To study the difficulties faced by the users by using payment applications.

1.3 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

1. The time for the study was limited.
2. Could not cover different categories of people like (people with different financial status
etc).
3. Sample method is being used for data collection and it is restricted for few people.

2
 1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The aim of the study is to determine the satisfaction of customers in using Google Pay and
PhonePe. As this area e-payment system is widely used. The study is conducted on
sampling method of survey.
1.5 METHODOLOGY
This study is exploratory in nature. Both primary and secondary data have been used for the
study. Primary data was collected with the pre-designed questionnaire to the
consumers in College region. 60 consumers were selected conveniently as samples. Study
on the basis of primary data helps to understand the customer satisfaction on Google
pay and Phonepe and the factors that influence their adoption. The method adopted for
the study is convenience sampling. The secondary data has been collected from the
Internet.

1.5.1TOOLS FOR PRESENTATION

Bar diagram and pie diagrams are used for the purpose of presentation of data.

1.5.2TOOLS FOR ANALYSIS

For analyzing the data, percentage and composite indices are used.

1.6 CHAPTERISATION
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Review of literature and theoretical framework Chapter
3: Data analysis and interpretation
Chapter 4: Findings, conclusions and suggestions

3
 CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

4
2.1 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1.1. Doan (2014) he conducted a study to understand consumer adoption on mobile wallets in
Finland area. This research was designed in a quantitative method using questionnaire which was
sent to potential respondents in Finland. The study measures the market condition of mobile wallets
users. The study findings reveal that the usage of mobile wallet is only in the initial stage and
respondents are showing positive attitudes towards usage of mobile wallets. Research concluded
that the trust factor reveal the positive or negative impact on adoption of user, depending on the
user satisfaction and user’s situation

2.1.2 Govender & Sihlali (2014) they explored the factors determine the adoption of mobile banking
(mbanking) services among students who are more technically knowledgeable. The
questionnaire is prepared based on the qualitative approach. Based on the extension of the
Technology Acceptance Model, the theoretical framework is developed to investigate the factors
that determine student’s acceptance of mobile banking. The constructs of TAM for mobile
adoption such as Perceived Ease of Use, Perceived usefulness, Perceived Value, Trust Intention to
Use, and Usage Behavior were used. The statistical tool multiple regression analysis was used to
examine the influence of independent variables on the dependent variable of intention to use m-
banking. The independent variables trust, perceived value, perceived ease of use and social
influence may account for 42percent on the influence of dependent variable.

2.1.3. Cabanillas [Link]., (2015) they have developed a model to examine user’s intention to use
mobile payment based on TAM and MPTAM (Mobile Payments Technology Acceptance Model).
The study was investigated the moderator effect of the user’s age between the subjective rules
and the facility of use. The survey has been conducted among the 2012 national panel of internet
user (physical & virtual). The analysis of data shows that an internet user’s behavior is influenced
by their intention to use new tools. The study findings show that most of the younger mobile
payment users are satisfied and accepted the mobile technology tools when compared to older
mobile users. This study has indicated that older consumers are the stronger relationship
between facility to use and subjective rules. So the mobile technology provider should give more
attention to older consumers to create knowledge about usable of new tools.

2.1.4 Meuthia (2015) the study has been investigated that empirically the experiences of users’
satisfaction on e-money adoption in Indonesia. In this study the trust was considered as an
important factor for e-money adopt, and at the time of promotes the system quality and
participation. The data was collected from 117 e-money respondents in Indonesia. The result shows
that users’ satisfaction is determined based on system quality and participation of users. The
research proposed that trust factors have high level followed by the others stimulants variables. The
study concluded that trust and distrust were strongly influenced the level of users’ satisfaction
on e-money adoption in Indonesia.

2.1.5Liu & Tai (2016) they have conducted a study in Vietnam to analyze the factors influencing
the consumer’s intention to use mobile payment services. The variables considered for the study
todetermine consumer’s intention to use of mobile payment services are mobility, mobile
payment knowledge, convenience, compatibility, ease of use, usefulness, risk, trust, and safety.
The two variables namely perceived ease to use and perceived usefulness was extracted from the
TAM model which was deemed as a suitable model to study consumers’ response and behaviors
when a new product is introduced. The data has been collected from 604 respondents. The result
shows that

5
among the four external variables compatibility has a strong influence on ease of use and perceived
usefulness is found to be a positive impact on the intention to use M-payment. The study
highlighted that trust and safety have no direct impact on usefulness but it has a direct impact on
the intention to use mobile payment. The study concluded that in Vietnam young people have
greater intention to use mobile payment services when compared to older people and most of
the consumers are not giving much importance to risk.

2.1.6Singh & Gupta (2016) They have conducted a study to identify various factors influence on
the adoption of mobile wallet payment among customers They considered the various variables
for the study are Convenience, Trust, Security, and Adaptability which have an impact on the
satisfaction of mobile wallet usage. The study was conducted in the Kurali city, District of Punjab.
Pearson's Correlation Analysis was to investigate the relationship between the different basic
variables of the study. The study findings show that mobile wallets are considered as the futures
of cash.

2.1.7Ahuja & Joshi (2018) have studied about the customer perception concerning Mobile wallets.
In this study they examined that the factors exploration technique is used to classify the factors
which influence customer opinion towards Mobile wallets. The study has been conducted about the
different types of mobile wallets in India. The data is collected from both secondary data and
primary data. The survey was conducted among 139 mobile respondents in the telecommunication
industry.

2.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Many of the research studies investigate that trust influences the users’ intention of mobile wallets
technologies usage. But not much research has been done to investigate trust as backgrounds of
user’s satisfaction on mobile wallet’s adoption. Some researchers have explored that trust in
technology as the main variable in the perspective of mobile payment and internet banking, some
research has considered trust as an antecedent to customer satisfaction – Cabanillas et al. (2015).
This study has directly impacted on trust intention to use mobile wallets. 19 Trust is the
important factor which affects the growth of the digital payment system in the rural areas which
is mainly due to a lack of awareness of consumer about security information. Dr. Saraswat S & Dr.
Mehta M (2017) the study was conducted about the mobile phone companies which provide new
technologies and many other benefits like surety, trust, privacy etc., Therefore this study focused on
cashless transactions and the problems faced by users, how they overcome the issues, how they
have accepted and accessed mobile payment services. the study suggested that government can
also make effects in speeding up the procedures by developing an expectation level which can
build the trust among the consumer. Kumar [Link]., (2018) the study proposed that trust affects the
users’ Satisfaction. This research is based on integrative research model. The consequence of this
study helped to prove that trust significantly influenced user’s satisfaction.
This study has been reviewed the relevant literature and discussions done by the national and
international researchers. The study has been conducted that users’ satisfaction affecting the
mobile wallets actual usage level. This research has proved the usage of mobile wallets based on
three levels likes consumer perception, preference and satisfaction. The study analyzed the factors
in influencing the consumer’s perception towards mobile wallet technology. The study has
included few transactions such as bill payment, fund transfer, online shopping, checking account
information and its relationship consumers’ satisfaction.

6
Hakim & Maamari (2017) this study has been measured that consumers’ perceived service quality
on the internet banking user’s satisfaction. This study suggested that a model to analyze the online
banking service quality and banks users satisfaction. The result shows that e-payment service
quality is important for service industries act as a driver of user satisfaction.
The glance at the top six trending mobile wallets,
1. Paytm Paytm is one of the most popular mobile wallets in India that offers users an online
payment platform for secure transactions. Paytm is a user-friendly application and easy to use.
Paytm,which is now a payments bank too, has over the last 4-5 years expanded into ecommerce,
ticketing, and distribution of financial products. As a payments bank, its focus is also on building a
banking customer base and to sell other financial products. Paytm is available on both platforms,
Android and iOS.
2. MobiKwik Mobikwik wallet is an online payment wallet system where a person after logging
in,can add money via his debit or credit card. After adding the money he or she can make
transactions on mobile, DTH, pay electricity bills and much more. You can undertake all these
transactions without any hard cash. MobiKwik is available to iOS, Android, and Windows Phone
users.
3. JioMoney JioMoney wallet has a simple interface and all the elements that matter are visible
at once to users. For instance, wallet balance, the option to recharge, send/request money, and pay
at a shop are present on the main page itself. It is available in Google Play Store and Apple
App Store.20
4. Oxigen Oxigen has a lively looking interface with a banner on special schemes running on top,
followed by the options that are available. You can send or ask for money, pay bills and get
recharges. Users feel secure with Oxigen while doing transaction because every time a sixdigit one-
time password (OTP) is sent to the registered mobile number. According to company website it has
a retail footprint of 1,00,000 outlets and has processed over 2 billion transactions till date with a
current transaction volume rate of 720 million transactions per annum. It has a large customer base
of over 150 million. The Oxigen wallet app is available only to Android users.
5. State Bank Buddy The mobile wallet app can be used to send money to new and registered
customers, book movies, flights and hotels, as well as for shopping. It also has features like
reminders to settle dues, recharge and pay bills instantly. This wallet app is available in 13
languages and allows users to set reminders for money transfers and clearing dues. The SBI Buddy
app is available in Google Play Store and Apple App Store. International Journal of Management,
Technology And Engineering Volume 8, Issue XII,
DECEMBER/2018 ISSN NO : 2249-7455 Page No:1733
6. Google Pay Google Pay (G pay) is a digital wallet platform and online payment system
developed by Google to power in-app and tap-to-pay purchases on mobile devices, enabling users to
make payments with Android phones, tablets or watches. Google Pay adopts the features of both
Android Pay and Google Wallet through its in-store, peer-to-peer, and online payments services.
Google Pay takes advantage of physical authentications such as fingerprint ID where available. On
devices without fingerprint ID, Google Pay is activated with a pass code. The simple way to send or
receive money with anyone, Shop, recharge, and more, Rewards that are endlessly rewarding, Pay
nearby, more than 50 banks listed under that google pay wallet, money is protected. Presently 200-
250 million of people are using a mobile wallet which is expected to grow to about 500 million users
in further. Most of the mobile wallets are offering cashback offer and discounts for an online payment
transaction to motivate the customer to do online payment.

7
 CHAPTER 3
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

8
The source of data collected is from the questionnaires distributed to people in College region.

Responses from 60 were collected.

3.1 AGE OF THE RESPONDENTS

Table 3.1

Age Category that use Online Payment

Age Group [Link] Respones Percentage

18-25 47 78.3

26-35 10 16.7

36-45 Nill Nill

Above 46 36 5

Total 60 100

Soure: Primary Data

Figure 3.1
Age category that use Online Payment

Source: Table 3.1

9
INTERPRETATION:
Respondents in the age category of 18-35, account of 78.3% of the response, which indicates that the
younger generation has more active participation in this project. This implies that online payments
are of much use among the younger generation as compared to the rest.

Table 3.2
Online Payment Usage on the basis of Gender

Gender Respondents Percentage

Male 28 46.7

Female 32 53.3

Transgender nil Nil

Total 60 100

Source: Primary Data

Table 3.2
Statistics of Online Payment Usage on the basis of Gender

Source: Table 3.2

INTERPRETATION:
A majority of 53.3% of respondents are women who use Google pay and PhonePe and a majority
of 46.7% of the respondents are male. This shows that women use online payment more.

10
 Table 3.33
Online Payment usage of respondents on the basis of occupation

Occupation No of Percentage
Respondents

Student 46 76.7

Government Employee
nil Nil

Private Employee 6 10

Others 8 13.3

Total 60 100

Source: Primary data

Figure 3.3

Statistics of Online Payment on the basis of occupation

Source: Table 3.3

INTERPRETATION:
A majority of 76.7% of respondents are students who use Google Pay and Phonepe. 10% of the
respondents are private employees who use Google Pay and Phonepe.

11
 Table 3.4

Range of bankingservices and payment options

Particulars No of Respondents Percentage

Yes 54 90

No 2 3.3

Maybe 4 6.7

Total 60 100

Source: Primary Data

Figure 3.4

Statistics of respondents using Online Payment

Source: Table 3.4

INTERPRETATION:
A majority of 90% of the respondents says Google Pay or Phone pe offer wider range of banking
services and payment options and only 3.3% of the respondents doesn’t support this statement.

12
 Table 3.5
Statistics of respondents not using online payment

Particulars Respondents Percentage

Lack of technical knowledge nil Nil

Insecure 1 7.1

Chance of Fraud 4 28.6

Lack of trust 4 28.6

Others 5 35.7

Total 14 100

Source: Primary Data

Figure 3.5
Statistics of respondents not using online payment

Source: Table 3.5

INTERPRETATION:
Respondents not using online payment in this project are of the opinion that online
payments are not safe due to reasons such that of fraudulent activities, insecurity, lack of
trust, technical issues etc.

13
 Table 3.6
Respondents whose phones support the app

Source: Primary
data

14
 Particulars Respondents Percentage

Yes 58 96.7

No 2 3.3

Total 60 100

Figure 3.6
Respondents whose phone support the app

Source: Table 3.6

INTERPRETATION:
A majority of 96.7% of respondent’s phones support google pay or phone pay and only 3.3% of
the respondent’s phone doesn’t support the same.

15
 Table 3.7
More preferred online payment app

Payment app No. of Respondents Percentage

Phone pe 5 8.3

Google Pay 55 91.7

Total 60 100

Source: Primary data

Figure 3.7
Most preferred online payment app

Source: Table 3.7

INTERPRETATION:
Most of 91.7% of the respondents prefer to use Google Pay than Phone Pe and only 8.3% of the
respondents prefer Phone Pe. This indicates that Google Pay is the most widely known and
used app.

16
 Table 3.8
Respondents usage of online payment app

Usage Respondents Percentage

Below 1 year 28 46.7

1 - 2 years 21 35

Above 2 years 11 18.3

Total 60 100

Source: Primary data

Figure 3.8
Respondents usage of online payment app

Source: Table 3.8

INTERPRETATION:
46.7% of people have been using the payment app below one year and 35% for one to two years
and 18.3% more than two years.

17
 Table 3.9
Satisfaction of respondents toward Google Pay

Highly Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Highly

satisfied dissatisfied

Frequency % Frequency % Frequency % Frequency % Frequency %

Convenient 26 43 27 45 6 10 1 1.6 0 0

User Friendly 24 40 26 43 8 13 2 3 0 0

Speed 18 30 25 42 12 20 5 8 0 0

Security 21 35 26 43 11 18 2 3 0 0

Communication 34 57 19 32 5 8 1 1.6 1 1.6

Language

Source: Primary data

Figure 3.9
Satisfaction of respondents towards Google Pay

Source: Table 3.9

18
INTERPRETATION:
A majority of 45% of the respondents has stated satisfied in terms of its convenience.
43% of the respondents has stated satisfied in term of user friendliness. 42% of the
respondents has stated satisfied in terms of its speed. 43% of the respondents has stated
satisfied in terms of its security and 57% of the respondents has stated highly satisfied in
terms of its communication language. This indicates that the respondents are satisfied
with the service provided by Google Pay.

Table: 3.10
Satisfaction of respondents toward Phone Pe

Highly Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Highly

satisfied dissatisfied

Frequency % Frequency % Frequency % Frequency % Frequency %

Convenient 11 18 26 43 19 32 3 5 1 2

User Friendly 10 17 28 47 19 32 2 3 1 2

Speed 14 23 23 38 19 32 3 5 1 2

Security 10 17 25 42 20 33 3 5 2 3

Communication 18 30 23 38 16 27 2 3 1 2

Language

Source: Primary data

Figure: 3.10
Satisfaction of respondents towards Phone Pe

Source: Table 3.10

19
INTERPRETATION:

A majority of 43% of the respondents has stated satisfied in terms of its convenience. 47% of
the respondents has stated satisfied in term of user friendliness. 38% of the respondents has
stated satisfied in terms of its speed. 42% of the respondents has stated satisfied in terms of
its security and 38% of the respondents has stated highly satisfied in terms of its
communication language. This indicates that the respondents are satisfied with the service
provided by Phone Pe.

Table 3.11
Usage of Online Payment by respondents

Particulars No of respondents Percentage

Daily 11 18.3

Weekly 20 33.3

Monthly 10 16.7

Occasionally 19 31.7

Total 60 100

Source: Primary data

Figure 3.11
Usage of Online Payment by respondents

Source: Table 3.11

INTERPRETATION
Most of 33.3% of the respondents preferred to use Google Pay or Phone pe weekly for their
transactions which shows the increasing popularity of the applications.

11
0
 Table 3.12
Respondents preferred app for transferring money among peers

No of Respondents

Particulars Percentage

Google Pay 55 91.7

Phonepe 5 8.3

Total 60 100

Source: Primary data

Figure 3.12
Respondents preferred app for transferring money among peers

Source: Table 3.12

INTERPRETATION

A majority of 91.7% of the respondents use Google Pay than Phone Pe for transferring money
among the peers and only 8.3% of the respondents use Phone Pe.

20
 Table 3.13
Online payment app that provide more payment options

Payment app Respondents Percentage

Phone Pe 9 15

Google Pay 51 85

Total 60 100

Source: Primary data

Figure 3.13
Online payment app that provide more payment option

Source: Table 3.13

INTERPRETATION
Google Pay provides more (85%) payment options when compared to Phone Pe (15%).

21
Source: Primary data

22
T
a
b
l
e

3
.
1
4
I
m
m
e
d
i
a
t
e

r
e
s
p
o
n
d
s

t
o

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r

q
u
e
r
i
e
s

23
 Payment app Respondent Percentage

Phone Pe 6 10

Google Pay 54 90

Total 60 100

Figure 3.14
Immediate responds to customer queries

Source: Table 3.14

INTERPRETATION:
Customer queries and problems are given fast responds by Google Pay than Phone Pe.
This indicates that Google Pay is readily available to meet the needs of the customers and
are customer friendly.

24
 Table 3.15
Cost and Time effective payment app
Payment app Respondents Percentage
Phone Pe 13 21.7

Google Pay 47 78.3

Total 60 100

Source: Primary data

Figure 3.15
Cost and Time effective payment app

Source: Table 3.15

INTERPRETATION:
Majority of 78.3% of the respondents find Google Pay more cost effective as well as time effective
than Phone pe which is only 21.7%.

25
 Table 3.16
App which does not need much legal formalities

Payment app Respondents Percentage

Phone Pe 10 16.7

Google Pay 50 83.3

Total 60 100

Source: Primary data

Figure 3.16
App which does not need much legal formalities

Source: Table 3.16

INTERPRETATION:
As compared to phone pe it has been observed that google pay uses less legal formalities as when
compared to phone pe

26
 Table 3.17
Promotional offers provided by Google Pay and Phone Pe

Google Phone Pe
Pay
Frequency % Frequency %

Rewards 51 85 9 15

Offer 45 75 15 25

Cash back 45 75 15 25

Source: Primary data

Figure 3.17
Promotional offers provided by Google Pay and Phone Pe

Source: Table 3.17

INTERPRETATION:

About 85% of the respondents has stated that Google Pay offers more rewards than that of Phone

Pe (9%). 45% of the respondents agree that Google Pay has more offers than that of Phone Pe (15%). 45%
of the respondents agree that Google Pay has more cash back than that of Phone Pe(15%).

27
 Table 3.18
Cash loss of respondents

Source: Primary
data

28
Payment app Respondents Percentage

Phone Pe Nil Nil

Google Pay 10 16.7

None 50 83.3

Total 60 100

Figure 3.18

29
 Cash loss of Respondents

Source: Table 3.18

INTERPRETATION:
Majority of the respondents (83.3%) have not faced any problem of cash loss. But 16.7% of
respondents lost cash through Google pay.

21
0
 Table 3.19
Security of Online Banking Services

Source: Primary
data

21
1
Particulars Respondents Percentage

YES 35 58.3

NO 4 6.7

MAYBE 21 35

Total 60 100

Figure 3.19

21
2
 Security of Online Banking Services

Source: Table 3.19

INTERPRETATION:
About 58.3% of respondents trust the security of Online Banking Services and only a small
fraction of 6.7% feel that its not secure. But 35% of respondents are neutral on security services
render

21
3
Source: Primary data

21
4
T
a
b
l
e

3
.
2
0

Q
u
a
l
i
t
y

o
f

G
o
o
g
l
e

P
a
y

21
5
 Particulars Respondents Percentage

Excellent 35 58.3

Average 25 41.7

Poor Nil nil

Total 60 100

Figure 3.20 Quality

of Google Pay

Source: Table 3.20

INTERPRETATION:
A majority of 58.3% of respondents find the quality of Google Pay as excellent and no number of
respondents find the quality poor.

21
6
Source: Primary data

21
7
T
a
b
l
e

3
.
2
0

Q
u
a
l
i
t
y

o
f

P
h
o
n
e

P
e

21
8
 Particulars Respondents Percentage

Excellent 32 62.7

Average 16 31.4

Poor 3 5.9

Total 60 100

Figure 3.21
Quality of Phone Pe

Source: Table 3.21

INTERPRETATION:
A majority of 31.4% of respondents find the quality of Phone Pe as excellent and 5.9% of
respondents find the quality poor.

21
9
 Table 3.22 Most
preferred app

Google Pay Phone Pe

Frequency % Frequency %

Bill Payment 53 88 7 12

Mobile Recharge 48 80 12 20

Fund Transfer 56 93 4 7

Ticket Booking 49 82 11 18

Food Order 47 78 13 22

Application Fees 53 88 7 12

Tax Pay 52 87 8 13

Others 50 83 10 17

Source: Primary data

Figure 3.22
Preferred app

Source: Table 3.22

30
INTERPRETATION:
A majority of 88% of the respondents has preferred to use Google Pay for bill payment, 80% for
mobile recharge, 93% for fund transfer, 82% for ticket booking, 78% for food ordering, 88% for
application fees, 87% for tax payment and 83% for others. This indicates that Google Pay is more
preferred more.

Table 3.23
Google Pay Services

Particulars Respondents Percentage

Restaurants 23 38.3

Stores 14 23.3

Others 23 38.3

Total 60 100

Source: Primary data

Figure 3.23
Google pay Services

Source: Table 3.23

INTERPRETATION:
Google pay is used for both restaurants and other services (38.3%) more than stores (23.3%).

31
Source: Primary data

32
T
a
b
l
e

3
.
2
4
P
h
o
n
e

P
e

S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s

33
 Particulars Respondents Percentage

Restaurants 12 25.5

Stores 13 27.7
Others 22 46.8

Total 60 100

Figure 3.24
Phone Pe Services

Source: Table 3.24

INTERPRETATION:
Phone Pe is used for other services (46.8%) more than restaurant (25.5%) and stores (27.7%). This
indicates that Google pay is acceptable foe rendering different services.

34
 Table 3.25 Most
Preferred app

Source: Primary
data

35
Payment app Respondents Percentage

Google

Pay 54 90

Phone Pe 6 10

Total 60 100

Figure 3.25 Most

preferred app

36
Source: Table 3.25

INTERPRETATION:
Here, 90% of the respondents stated that they would refer Google pay to their friends and only a
fraction of 10% of the respondents would refer phone pe .

37
 Table 3.26
Rating of Google Pay

Google Pay
No of respondents Percentage
0-1 0 0
1-2 0 0
2-3 0 0
3-4 0 0
4-5 4 6.6
5-6 6 10
6-7 10 16.7
7-8 22 36.7
8-9 11 18.3
9-10 7 11.7
Total 60 100
Source: Primary data

Figure: 3.26
Rating of Google Pay

Source: Table 3.26

INTREPERTATIION:
On a scale of 10 a majority of 36.7% of the respondents has given an ‘8’ and 6.7% has given ‘5’ for
Google Pay. This shows that Google pay has good rating among the respondents.

38
 Table 3.27
Rating of Phone Pe

PHONE PE
No of respondents Percentage
0-1 0 0
1-2 0 0
2-3 1 1.6
3-4 4 6.7
4-5 9 15
5-6 13 21.7
6-7 10 16.7
7-8 14 23.3
8-9 5 8.3
9-10 4 6.7
Total 60 100

Source: Primary data

Figure: 3.27
Rating of Phone Pe

Source: Table 3.27

INTERPRETATION:On a Scale of 10 a majority of 23.3% of the responded has given an’8’ and 1.7% has

given ‘3’ for Phone Pe.

39
 CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

31
0
4.1FINDINGS

• Respondents in the age category of 18-35, account of 78.3% of the response, which indicates that the
younger generation has more active participation in this project. This implies that online payments are of
much use among the younger generation as compared to the rest.

• A majority of 53.3% of respondents are women who use Google pay and Phonepe.

• A majority of 76.7% of respondents are students who use Google Pay and Phonepe.

• A majority of 90% of the respondents use Google Pay or Phone pe.

• Respondents not using online payment in this project are of the opinion that online payments are not safe
due to reasons such that of fraudulent activities, insecurity, lack of trust, technical issues etc.

• A majority of 96.7% of respondent’s phones support google pay or phone pay

• Most of the respondents prefer to use Google Pay than Phone Pe. This indicates that Google Pay is the most
widely known and used app.

• 46.7% of people have been using the payment app below one year and 35% for one to two years and 18.3%
more than two years.

• Majority of the respondents stated‘satisfied’ with the service provided by Google Payin terms
of convenience, user friendly, speed, security and communication language.

• Majority of the respondents stated‘satisfied’ with the service provided by Phone Pein terms of
convenience, user friendly, speed, security and communication language.

• Most of the respondents preferred to use Google Pay or Phone pe weekly for their transactions which
shows the increasing popularity of the applications.

• A majority of 91.7% of respondents use Google Pay than Phone Pe.

• Google Pay provides more (85%) payment options when compared to Phone Pe (15%).
• Customer queries and problems are given fast responds by Google Pay than Phone Pe. This indicates that
Google Pay is readily available to meet the needs of the customers and are customer friendly.

• Majority of the respondents find Google Pay more cost effective as well as time effective than Phone pe.
• As compared to phone pe it has been observed that google pay uses less legal formalities as when
compared to phone pe.

• About 85% of the respondents has stated that Google Pay offers more rewards than that of Phone Pe (9%).
45% of the respondents agree that Google Pay has more offers than that of Phone Pe (15%). 45% of the
respondents agree that Google Pay has more cash back than that of Phone Pe(15%).

31
1
 • Majority of the respondents (83.3%) have not faced any problem of cash loss. But 16.7% of respondents lost
cash through Google pay.

• About 58.3% of respondents trust the security of Online Banking Services and only a small fraction of 6.7%
feel that it’s not secure. But 35% of respondents are neutral on security services rendered.

• A majority of 58.3% of respondents find the quality of Google Pay as excellent and no number of
respondents find the quality poor.

• A majority of 62.7% of respondents find the quality of Phone Pe as excellent and 5.9% of respondents find
the quality poor.

• A majority of 88% of the respondents has preferred to use Google Pay for bill payment, 80% for mobile
recharge, 93% for fund transfer, 82% for ticket booking, 78% for food ordering, 88% for application fees,
87% for tax payment and 83% for others. This indicates that Google Pay is more preferred more.

• Google pay is used for both restaurants and other services (38.3%) more than stores (23.3%).

• Phone Pe is used for other services (46.8%) more than restaurant (25.5%) and stores (27.7%). This indicates
that Google pay is acceptable foe rendering different services.

• Here, google pay (90%) is the most preferred app, and only a fraction of 10% prefer phone pe (10%).

• On a scale of 10 a majority of 36.7% of the respondents has given an ‘8’ and 6.7% has given ‘5’ for Google
Pay.

• On a scale of 10 a majority of 23.3% of the respondents has given an ‘8’ and 1.7% has given ‘3’ for Phone Pe.

4.2SUGGESTIONS

Both google pay and phone pe can revolutionize online payments and take cashless transaction to the next level,
But then

• The customers need to be convinced about the safety of mobile wallets and their advantages.

• They need to be induced to use mobile wallets for all kinds of payments by making attractive offers sucha s
cashback offer etc.

• All doubts and ignorances in that regard need to be addressed effectively to pump up the use of
mobile wallets.

4.3CONCLUSION

Consumers’ knowledge about new mobile technology innovation is increasing rapidly, and consumer’s perception
is most important in the usage of mobile wallet application in India. Consumers’ need has increased with
advanced technology. Consequently mobile wallets service providers are innovating new technology from
consumer’s point of view. Therefore, people can adopt and use their mobile wallets for the payment transaction,
fund transfer, purchasing groceries and paying bills etc. The study has discussed the trust is the main factor
affecting users’
satisfaction directly and it impacts on many users intention to adopt mobile wallets. The results show that the trust

31
2
has significantly positive impact on actual usage of mobile wallets. Vidyashree et. al., (2015) found that
mobile wallet provides an opportunity of cash back and discounts. The study highlights that 18-30, 30-45 age
group of people satisfied and using of digital wallets like paytm or pay u money application.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

JOURNALS

1. Aijaz A. Shaikh &HeikkiKarjaluoto (2016)-Mobile banking services continuous usage – Case study of Finland

2. Ajax Persaud and Irfan Azhar (2012) “Innovative mobile marketing via smartphones Are consumers
ready?”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 30 No. 4, 2012, pp. 418-443, DOI
10.1108/02634501211231883, Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0263-4503

3. Anjali Ahuja &Richa Joshi (2018) “Customer Perception towards Mobile Wallet”, IJRDOJournal of Business
Management - ISSN: 2455-6661.

4. BasavarajNageshKadamudimatha (2016) “Digital Wallet: The next way of growth” - International Journal of
Commerce and Management Research.

5. Dennehy, D. &Sammon, D., 2015. “Trends in mobile payments research: A literature Review”, Journal of
Innovation Management, 3(1), pp. 49-61.

WEBSITS

1. [Link]

2. [Link]

3. [Link]

4. [Link]

31
3
 QUESTIONNAIRE
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ON GOOGLE PAY AND PHONE PE

1. NAME:

2. AGE: (a) Above 18 (b) 25-35 (c) 35-45 (d) 45 and above

3. GENDER: (a) Male (b) Female (c) Transgender

4. OCCUPATION: : (a) Student (b) Government employee (c) Private employee (d) Others

5. Do you think using online payment can offer you a wider range of banking services and payment options?

a) Yes
b) No
c) Maybe

6. If no, select the reason for not using online payment.

a) Lack of technical knowledge

b) Unsecure
c) Chance of fraud
d) Lack of trust
e) Others

7. Does your phone support these apps? (Phone Pe, Google Pay)

a) Yes
b) No
8. Which app do you prefer more for online payment?

a) Phone pe
b) Google pay
9. How long have you been using this app?

a) Below 1 year

40
 b) 1-2 years
c) Above 2 years

10. Are you satisfied with the service Google pay provide you?

CONVENIENT
a) Highly satisfied
b) Satisfied
c) Neutral
d) Dissatisfied
e) Highly dissatisfied

USER FRIENDLY

a) Highly satisfied
b) Satisfied
c) Neutral
d) Dissatisfied
e) Highly dissatisfied

SPEED

a) Highly satisfied
b) Satisfied
c) Neutral
d) Dissatisfied
e) Highly dissatisfied

SECURITY

a) Highly satisfied
b) Satisfied
c) Neutral
d) Dissatisfied
e) Highly dissatisfied

COMMUNICATION LANGUAGE

41
 a) Highly satisfied
b) Satisfied
c) Neutral
d) Dissatisfied
e) Highly dissatisfied

11. Are you satisfied with the service Phone pe provide you?

CONVENIENT

a) Highly satisfied
b) Satisfied
c) Neutral
d) Dissatisfied
e) Highly dissatisfied

USER FRIENDLY

a) Highly satisfied
b) Satisfied
c) Neutral
d) Dissatisfied
e) Highly

dissatisfied SPEED

a) Highly satisfied
b) Satisfied
c) Neutral
d) Dissatisfied
e) Highly dissatisfied
SECURITY

a) Highly satisfied
b) Satisfied

42
 c) Neutral
d) Dissatisfied
e) Highly dissatisfied

COMMUNICATION LANGUAGE

a) Highly satisfied
b) Satisfied
c) Neutral
d) Dissatisfied
e) Highly dissatisfied

12. How often do you use this app?

a) Daily
b) Weekly
c) Monthly
d) Occasionally

13. What is your preferred payment app for transferring money among peers?

a) Google pay
b) Phone pe

14. Which payment app provides more payment options?

a) Google pay
b) Phone pe
15. Which app has quick response to your (customer) queries?

a) Google pay
b) Phone pe

16. Which app is more likely to be cost and time effective?

a) Google pay
b) Phone pe

17. Which app does not require much legal formalities to start p?

43
 a) Google pay
b) Phone pe

18. Which app provides more promotional offers?

REWARDS

c) Google pay
d) Phone pe

OFFERS

a) Google pay
b) Phone pe

CASH BACK

a) Google pay
b) Phone pe

19. Have you ever had cash lose from your account, If yes from

a. Google pay

b. Phone pe

c. None

20. Do you trust the security of online banking services?

a. Yes

b. No

c. Maybe

21. How would you rate the quality of Google pay?

a. Excellent

b. Average

c. Poor

22. How would you rate the quality of phone pe?

a. Excellent

b. Average

44
 c. Poor

23. Which app do you prefer more for the following?

BILL PAYMENT

a) Google pay
b) Phone pe

MOBILE RECHARGE

a) Google pay
b) Phone pe

FUND TRANSFER U

a) Google pay
b) Phone pe
TICKET BOOKING

a) Google pay
b) Phone

pe FOOD

ORDER

a) Google pay
b) Phone pe

APPLICATION FEES

a) Google pay
b) Phone pe

TAX PAY

a) Google pay
b) Phone

pe OTHERS

a) Google pay
b) Phone pe

45
24. Does your preferred app (Google pay) provide services at:

a) Restaurant
b) Stores
c) Others

25. . Does your preferred app (Phone pe) provide services at:

a) Restaurant
b) Stores
c) Others
26. Which of these apps would you recommend to your friends?

a) Google pay
b) Phone pe

27. How would you rate Google pay on a scale of 10?

a) 1
b) 2
c) 3
d) 4
e) 5
f) 6
g) 7
h) 8
i) 9
j) 10

28. How would you rate Phone pe on a scale of 10?

a) 1
b) 2
c) 3
d) 4
e) 5

46
f) 6
g) 7
h) 8
i) 9
j) 10

47