CHAPTER 4

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

This chapter deals with Analysis of consumer perception towards online food delivery system.
The Aim of the study is to find out consumer perception, their willingness to order, satisfaction
level, most prominent food delivery application. The data collected directly from fifty consumers
in Aluva municipality.
Aluva is a region in kochi City in Kerala, India. It is also a part of the Kochi metropolitan area
and is situated around 15km from the city centre on the bank of periyar [Link] also serves
as the administrative centre of the Aluva taluk. Aluva is still only an autonomous municipality
with its civic administration conducted by Aluva municipal council, primarily because Kochi
corporation has not expanded its limits for over 53 years.
The data collected are arranged and analysed systematically in this chapter. The data obtained
from the survey about consumers perception are depicted in the form of tables and figures
below

Table 4.1

Age wise classification of the respondent

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

15-25 33 66
26-35 9 18

36-45 5 10

Above 46 3 6

Total 50 100

Source: Primary data

Table 4.1 presents the classification of respondents based on age groups. According to the
table, the majority of the respondents, which is 66 percent, fall within the age group of 15-25
years. Additionally, 18 percent of the respondents belong to the age group of 26-35 years.
Furthermore, 10 percent of the respondents are in the age group of 36-45 years, while only 6
percent of the respondents are over 46 years of age.

Figure 4.1
 Age wise classification of the respondents

70

60

50 no of responents
percentage
40

30

20

10

0
15-25 26-35 36-45 above46

Source: primary data

Figure 4.1 reveals that 66 percent of the respondents fall within the age group of 15-25 years,
while 18 percent belong to the age group of 26-35 years. Furthermore, 10 percent of the
respondents are in the age group of 36-45 years. It is evident from this data that the majority of
the respondents belong to the youth category.
Table 4.2

Gender wise classification of the respondents

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Male 35 70
Female 15 30

Others 0 0

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.2 presents the gender-wise classification of the respondents. The table indicates that
the majority of the respondents, accounting for 70 percent, were females, while 30 percent were
males. This distribution is visually represented in the accompanying diagram.
Figure 4.2

Gender wise classification of the re-

spondents

80
70
no of responents
60
percentage
50
40
30
20
10
0
Male Female Others

Source: primary data

Figure 4.2 reveals that the majority of the respondents, specifically 70%, are females, while 30%
of the respondents are males. This data suggests that online food services are primarily utilized
by women. It can be inferred that women in the present generation hold significant importance,
as they possess both knowledge and financial strength.

Table 4.3

Classification of the respondents on the basis of educational level

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Under graduate 20 40
graduate 14 28
Post graduate 12 24
Any other 4 8

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.3 presents the classification of respondents based on their education levels. The table
reveals that the majority of the respondents, accounting for 40%, hold undergraduate degrees.
Furthermore, 28% of the respondents are categorized as graduates, while 24% possess
postgraduate degrees. An additional 8% of the respondents fall into the "others" category, which
includes individuals with alternative forms of education.

Figure 4.3

Classification of the respondents on the

basis of educational level

45
40
35 no of responents
percentage
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Under graduates Graduates Post graduates Others

Source: primary data

Figure 4.3 illustrates the percentage distribution of respondents based on their education levels.
The highest proportion of respondents, 40%, were categorized as undergraduates, falling under
category 1. 28% of the respondents were categorized as graduates, while 24% were
postgraduates. Only 8% of the respondents were categorized as category four. These findings
suggest that the literacy rate of the population surveyed and the educational level of the
respondents are not lagging behind.

Table 4.4
Classification of the respondents on the basis of monthly income

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Under 10000 11 22
10000 - 20000 11 22
30000 - 40000 5 10
More than 50000 5 10

Not Employed 118 36

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.4 presents the classification of respondents based on their monthly income. According
to the table, 36% of the respondents are not employed. Additionally, 22% of the respondents
belong to the income range of under 10000 and 10000-20000. Furthermore, 10% of the
respondents fall within the income range of 30000-40000, and there are respondents with an
income of more than 50000.

Figure 4.4

Classification of the respondents on the

basis of monthly income

25

20 no of responents
percentage
15

10

0
Under 10000 10000 - 20000 30000 - 40000 More than 50000

Source: primary data

Figure 4.4 reveals that 36% of the respondents belong to category five, indicating that they are
not employed. Additionally, 11% of the respondents fall under the income range of under 10000
and 10000-20000. Moreover, 5% of the respondents fall within the income range of 30000-
40000 and more than 50000. These findings suggest that the majority of the respondents who
are not employed could possibly be students.

Table 4.5

Consumer familiarity with online food delivery application

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Yes 40 80
No 5 10
Neutral 3 6
Not Responding 2 4

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.5 displays the level of awareness of consumers regarding online food delivery
applications, categorized into four groups: "yes," "no," "neutral," and "not responding." The "yes"
category represents the number of respondents who are aware of online food delivery
applications, with 80% of the respondents being aware of them. The "no" category represents
those who have no knowledge of online food delivery applications, with 10% of the respondents
belonging to this category. The "neutral" category includes those who have little knowledge
about online food delivery applications, with 6% of the respondents belonging to this group.
Finally, the "not responding" category includes 4% of the respondents who did not provide a
response.

Figure 4.5

consumer familiarity with online food de-

livery applications

90
80
70 no of responents
percentage
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Yes No Neutral Not Responding

Source: Primary data

Figure 4.5 shows the consumer perception and the awareness in online food delivery
applications. Majority of the respondents were aware about online food delivery applications.80
percent of respondents were fully aware and 10 percent did not know about any food delivery
applications. 6 percent are neutral and 4 percent did not answer.

Table 4.6

Willingness to purchase food online

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Yes 37 74
No 8 16
Neutral 5 10
Not Responding 0 0

Total 50 100

Source: Primary data

Table 4.6 presents the respondents' willingness to purchase food online, categorized into four
groups: "yes," "no," "neutral," and "not responding." The table shows that out of the total
respondents, 37 (74%) answered "yes," indicating that they are willing to purchase food online.
16% of the respondents answered "no," indicating that they do not purchase food online. 10% of
the respondents answered "neutral," indicating that they had little awareness about online food
purchase. Notably, none of the respondents chose the "not responding" option.

Figure 4.6
 willingness to purchase food online

80

70

60
no of responents
50 percentage

40

30

20

10

0
Yes No Neutral Not Responding

Source: Primary data

Figure 4.6 depicts the online food purchasing behaviour of respondents, where the majority of
respondents indicated that they would purchase food online, with 74% responding "yes." The
"yes" response indicates that they are willing to purchase food online, while 16% of the
respondents answered "no," indicating that they do not purchase food online. These findings
suggest that the majority of respondents are fully aware of the online food delivery service and
are willing to utilize it.

Table 4.7

Online food delivery application preferred by consumer

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Swiggy 32 64
Zomato 16 32
Uber Eats 1 2
Others 1 2

Total 50 100

Source: Primary data

Table 4.7 displays the preferred online food delivery applications by consumers, categorized
into four groups: Swiggy, Zomato, Uber Eats, and Others. The table shows that 32 respondents
(64%) selected category one, indicating their preference for Swiggy, while 16 respondents
(32%) preferred Zomato. 2% of the respondents preferred Uber Eats and other applications.

Figure 4.7

online food delivery option preferred by

consumers

70

60
no of responents
50 percentage

40

30

20

10

0
Swiggy Zomato Uber Eats Others

Source: Primary data

Figure 4.7 illustrates the online food delivery application preferences of respondents, where
64% of respondents used Swiggy, 32% preferred Zomato, and 2% used Uber Eats and other
applications. The results suggest that the majority of respondents prefer Swiggy, making it the
most preferred food delivery application, followed by Zomato.

Table 4.8

Consumer reasons for ordering food online

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Less effort 12 24
Occasional discounts & offers 13 26
Save time 16 32
Variety of choices 6 12

Others 3 6
 Total 50 100

Source: Primary data

Table 4.8 displays the reasons for ordering food online, categorized into five groups. The table
shows that 24% of respondents preferred online food delivery due to less effort. Occasional
discounts and offers were selected by 26% of respondents, while 32% preferred online food
delivery to save time. A variety of food options were selected by 12% of the respondents, while
only 6% chose "others" as their reason for ordering food online.

Figure 4.8

Consumer reasons for ordering food online

35

30

25 no of responents
percentage
20

15

10

0
Less effort Occasional discounts & offers Save time Variety of choices

Source: Primary data

Figure 4.8 depicts the reasons for using online food delivery systems. The results indicate that
32% of respondents preferred online food delivery to save time, 26% chose online delivery for
occasional discounts and offers, and 24% selected online delivery for its convenience in
requiring less effort. Additionally, 12% of respondents preferred online delivery due to the
variety of food choices available, while a small percentage of respondents (6) chose other
reasons. Overall, the results suggest that the majority of respondents used online food delivery
to save time and take advantage of occasional discounts and offers provided by the restaurants.

Table 4.9

Frequency of orders

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

0-5 times a month 39 78
5-10 times a month 10 20
More than 15 times a month 1 2
Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.9 displays the frequency of ordering food online among the respondents. The results
show that 78% of the respondents reported ordering food online up to 5 times a month, while
20% of the respondents reported ordering food online between 5 to 15 times a month. Only 2%
of the respondents reported ordering food online more than 15 times a month.
Figure 4.9

frequency of orders

0-5 times a month

5-10 times a month
More than 15 times a month

Source: primary data

The figure 4.9 illustrates the frequency of ordering of consumers. It is evident from the data
collected from respondents that the majority of them (78%) order food online up to 5 times a
month. 20% of respondents belong to the category of 5 to 15 times a month, and only 2% of
respondents order food more than 15 times a month. This suggests that the respondents use
online food delivery services on an occasional basis
Table 4.10

Amount spent by the consumers on a single order

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Below 250 19 38
250-500 20 40
500-1000 9 18
Above 1000 2 4

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.10 displays the amount spent by consumers on a single food order, with four categories
provided. Among the respondents, 38% (19) selected category 1, which represents an amount
below 250. 40% of the respondents chose category 2, which corresponds to an amount
between 250 and 500. 18% of the respondents belonged to category 3, which indicates an
amount between 500 and 1000, while only 4% of the respondents selected the fourth category.

Figure 4.10
 Amount spent by the consumers on a single
order

Below 250
250-500
500-1000
Above 1000

Source: primary data

Figure 4.10 shows that the data collected indicates that 38% of the respondents spend below
250 Rupees on a single order, while 40% of them spend 250-500 Rupees. 18% of the
respondents spend 500-1000 Rupees, and the remaining 4% spend 1000 Rupees or more on a
single order. This indicates that most respondents spend moderately on their online food orders.

Table 4.11

Promptness of delivery executive with respect to the delivery time

specified in the application

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Yes 35 70
No 4 8
Neutral 8 16
Not Responding 3 6

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.11 presents the promptness of delivery executives in relation to the delivery time
specified in the application. The table includes four categories: 'yes,' 'no,' 'neutral,' and 'not
responding.' According to the table, 35 respondents selected 'yes,' indicating that they
experienced prompt delivery. On the other hand, 4 respondents chose 'no,' reporting that the
delivery executives were not prompt. Additionally, 8 respondents fell into the 'neutral' category,
suggesting a mixed response on the promptness of the delivery executives. The remaining
respondents did not provide a response.

Figure 4.11

Promptness of delivery executive with

respect to the delivery time specified in
the application

80
no of responents
70
percentage
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Yes No Neutral Not Responding

Source: primary data

Figure 4.11 reveals that 70% of the respondents agree that they received their deliveries on
time. Additionally, 16% of the respondents selected the neutral option, indicating a mixed
response where they sometimes agree and sometimes disagree regarding the timeliness of
deliveries. Furthermore, 8% of the respondents chose 'No,' expressing disagreement with
receiving deliveries on time. It is worth noting that 6% of the respondents did not provide a
response. These findings suggest that the majority of the respondents receive their deliveries on
time.

Table 4.12

Consumers experience on the quantity of food ordered with respect

to the quantity specified in the application

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Yes 39 78
No 4 8
Neutral 4 8
Not Responding 3 6

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.12 presents the consumer's experience regarding the quantity of food ordered in
relation to the quantity specified in the application. The table includes four categories: 'yes,' 'no,'
'neutral,' and 'not responding.' According to the table, 78% of the respondents selected 'yes,'
indicating that they received the same quantity as specified. On the other hand, 8% of the
respondents chose 'no,' reporting that they did not receive the specified quantity. Additionally,
6% of the respondents fell into the 'neutral' category, reflecting a neutral stance on the matter.
The remaining respondents, accounting for 6%, did not provide a response.

Figure 4.12

Consumers experience on the quantity of

food ordered with respect to the quantity
specified in the application

80
no of responents
70
percentage
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Yes No Neutral Not Responding

Source: primary data

Figure 4.12 reveals that 78% of the respondents received the same quantity of food as specified
in the application. Additionally, 8% of the respondents reported not receiving the same quantity
as specified. Another 8% of the respondents remained neutral on this matter. It is worth noting
that 6% of the respondents did not provide a response.

Table 4.13
Mode of payment preferred by consumers in ordering food online

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Cash on Delivery 23 46
Debit or Credit Card 9 18
Online Payment 17 34
Others 1 2

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.13 presents the preferred mode of payment among consumers. According to the table,
46% of the respondents opt for cash on delivery as their preferred payment method.
Additionally, 18% of the respondents choose to use debit or credit cards for making payments.
34% of the respondents prefer online payments, while a small portion of 2% selects other
payment methods.

Figure 4.13

Mode of payment preferred by consumers

in ordering food online
50
45
40
35 no of responents
30 percentage

25
20
15
10
5
0
Cash on Delivery Debit or Credit Card Online Payment Others

Source: primary data

Figure 4.13 illustrates the payment preferences of respondents for online food deliveries.
According to the figure, 46% of the respondents prefer the cash-on-delivery method for making
payments. Additionally, 34% of the respondents opt to make payments online, while 18%
choose to use debit or credit cards. The remaining 2% of the respondents utilize other payment
methods.

Table 4.14

Consumers experience on being served food of poor quality through

online food delivery application

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Yes 11 22
No 29 58
Neutral 6 12
Not Responding 4 8

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.14 displays the assessment of food quality in online food delivery applications. The
table include four categories: Yes, No, Neutral, and Not Responding. According to the table,
22% of the respondents selected "Yes," indicating they have experienced poor food quality. On
the other hand, 58% s of the respondents chose "No," suggesting they have not encountered
inferior food quality. Additionally, 12% of the respondents selected "Neutral," reflecting a neutral
stance on the matter. The remaining respondents fell into the "Not Responding" category.

Figure 4.14
 Consumers experience on being served
food of poor quality through online food
delivery application

70
no of responents
60 percentage
50
40
30
20
10
0
Yes No Neutral Not Responding

Source: primary data

Figure 4.14 provides insight into the respondents' experiences regarding the quality of food
served through online food delivery applications. From the collected data, it is evident that 58%
of the respondents reported having no instances where they received food of inferior quality.
Conversely, 22% of the respondents agreed that they have been served poor quality food
through online food delivery applications. Additionally, 12% of the respondents remained neutral
on this matter, while only 8% did not respond.

Table 4.15

Consumer satisfaction with the security of application

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Yes 25 50
No 14 28
Neutral 10 20
Not Responding 1 2

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.15 presents the satisfaction of consumers with the security of the online food delivery
system. The table includes four categories: Yes, No, Neutral, and Not Responding. According to
the table, 50% of the respondents selected "Yes," indicating they are satisfied with the security
of the system. On the other hand, 28% of the respondents chose "No," expressing
dissatisfaction with the security. Additionally, 10% of the respondents selected "Neutral,"
suggesting a neutral stance on the matter. The remaining 2% fell into the "Not Responding"
category, indicating they did not provide a response.
Figure 4.15

Consumer satisfaction with the security of

application

30

25 no of responents
percentage
20

15

10

0
Yes No Neutral Not Responding

Source: primary data

Figure 4.15 illustrates the perception of security among respondents regarding the online food
delivery system. According to the figure, 25% of the respondents expressed that they consider
the system to be secure. On the other hand, 28% of the respondents reported that they did not
find any secure applications. Additionally, 20% of the respondents remained neutral, indicating a
combination of both positive and negative views. It is worth noting that 2% of the respondents
did not provide a response.

Table 4.16

Classification based on the variety of food preferred by consumers

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Indian 28 56
Chinese 7 14
Arabian 11 22
Others 4 8

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.16 presents the classification of food varieties preferred by consumers. The table
includes four categories: Indian, Chinese, Arabian, and Others. According to the table, 56% of
the respondents prefer Indian food, 14% prefer Chinese cuisine, 22% opt for Arabian dishes,
and the remaining respondents selected other varieties of food.

Figure 4.16

Classification based on the variety of food

preferred by consumers

60

50 no of responents
percentage
40

30

20

10

0
Indian Chinese Arabian Others

Source: primary data

Figure 4.16 depicts the preferences of respondents when it comes to ordering food online.
According to the figure, 56% of the respondents prefer to order Indian cuisine, while 22% opt for
Arabian varieties. Additionally, 14% of the respondents prefer Chinese cuisine, and the
remaining 8% have a preference for other varieties of food when ordering online.

Table 4.17

Challenges of online food delivery system

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Site is slow 24 48
Service is not opening 11 22
Delivery time is more 11 22
Service follow up is poor 4 8

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.17 presents the main challenges faced by customers during the process of food
ordering. According to the table, 48% of the respondents experienced difficulties with a poor
site. Additionally, 22% of the respondents reported challenges related to service not opening
and longer delivery times. The remaining respondents expressed concerns about poor service
follow-up.

Figure 4.17

Challenges of online food delivery system

60

50

40

30
no of responents
20 percentage
10

0
or
ng

e
ow

or

po
ni

m
sl

pe

is
is
is

to

up
e
te

tim
no
Si

w
llo
is

y
er

fo
e
ic

iv

e
rv

el

ic
Se

rv
D

Se

Source: primary data

Figure 4.17 illustrates the challenges faced by customers during the process of food ordering.
According to the figure, 48% of the respondents identified network issues or poor server as the
main challenge. Additionally, 22% of the respondents mentioned that delays in delivery and
service not opening were the primary challenges they encountered while ordering food online.
The remaining respondents categorized their challenges as service follow-up.

Table 4.18

Consumer difficulty in receiving deliveries

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Yes 9 18
No 31 62
Neutral 8 16
Not Responding 2 4

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.18 presents the problems or difficulties faced by consumers in receiving deliveries. The
table includes four categories: "yes," "no," "neutral," and "not responding." Within these
categories, 18% of the respondents fell into the "yes" category, indicating they encountered
problems. The majority, 62% of respondents, answered "yes" to having difficulties. Additionally,
16% of the respondents remained neutral on the matter, while the remaining 4% did not provide
a response.

Figure 4.18

Consumer difficulty in receiving deliveries

70

60

50
no of responents
40 percentage

30

20

10

0
Yes No Neutral Not Responding

Source: primary data

Figure 4.18 depicts the difficulty faced by consumers in receiving deliveries. According to the
figure, 62% of the respondents reported not encountering any problems or difficulties while
receiving deliveries. In contrast, 18% of the respondents stated that they faced issues in this
regard. Additionally, 16% of the respondents remained neutral on the matter, while 2% did not
provide a response.

Table 4.19
Satisfaction level of consumers

+ No. Of respondents Percentage

Highly satisfied 17 34
Satisfied 28 56
Neutral 7 14
Dissatisfied 3 6

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.19 presents the satisfaction level of consumers regarding the online food delivery
system. The table includes four categories: highly satisfied, satisfied, neutral, and dissatisfied.
According to the table, 17% of the respondents reported being highly satisfied, 28% expressed
satisfaction, and 14% remained neutral. Only 6% of the respondents indicated dissatisfaction
with the online food delivery system.

Figure 4.19

Satisfaction level of consumers

90

80

70

60
percentage
50 no of responents

40

30

20

10

0
Highly satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied

Source: primary data

Figure 4.19 illustrates the satisfaction level of consumers regarding the online food delivery
system. According to the figure, 48% of the respondents expressed satisfaction, among which
17% were highly satisfied. Additionally, 14% of the respondents remained neutral, while 6%
expressed dissatisfaction. It can be observed that the majority of the respondents were satisfied
with the online food delivery system.

Table 4.20

Consumers view on the usefulness of the online food delivery

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Strongly Agree 17 34
Agree 22 44
Neutral 9 16
Disagree 1 2

Strongly Disagree 1 2

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.20 displays the usefulness of online food delivery systems. Among the respondents,
34% strongly agree that online food delivery systems are useful in life. Additionally, 44% agree
with this notion, while 18% remain neutral. Only 2% of the respondents fall into categories 4 and
5, indicating disagreement with the usefulness of online food delivery systems.

Figure 4.20
 Consumers view on the usefulness of the
online food delivery

Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree

Source: primary data

Figure 4.20 illustrates the consumers' perspective on the usefulness of online food delivery.
According to the figure, 44% of the respondents agree, while 2% disagree. This data suggests
that online food delivery systems are considered useful in today's life.

Table 4.21

Classification of Gadgets used by consumer

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Simple Cell phone 5 10

Smartphone 35 70
Laptop 8 16
iPad 2 4

Others 0 0

Total 50 100

Source: primary data

Table 4.21 displays the preferred technology or gadgets used for ordering food. The table
includes five categories: simple cell phone, smartphone, laptop, iPad, and others. According to
the table, 10% of the respondents selected a simple cell phone for food ordering, while 70%
preferred smartphones. Additionally, 8% of the respondents chose laptops, and 2% opted for
iPads. Notably, there were no responses in the "others" category.

Figure 4.21

Classification of Gadgets used by consumer

80

70

60

50 no of responents
percentage
40

30

20

10

0
Simple Cell phone Smartphone Laptop iPad

Source: primary data

Figure 4.21 illustrates that 70% of the respondents utilized smartphones for food ordering, while
8% used laptops, 5% relied on simple cell phones, and 2% chose iPads. The majority of the
respondents preferred using smartphones for this purpose.

Table 4.22

Consumers view on Ease and convenience of online food

applications

Category No. Of respondents Percentage

Yes 35 70
No 9 16
Neutral 6 12
Not Responding 0 0

Total 50 100
Source: primary data

Table 4.22 presents the consumers' views on the ease and convenience of electronic food
ordering. Out of the respondents, 35 (70%) expressed agreement, 9 (18%) expressed
disagreement, and 6 respondents indicated a neutral stance. No respondents provided a
response for this category.

Figure4.22

Consumers view on Ease and convenience

of online food applications

Yes
No
Neutral
Not Responding

Source: primary data

Figure 4.22 indicates that 70% of the respondents agree that the electronic food ordering
system is easy and convenient. 18% of the respondents expressed their opinion that they do not
consider this system to be easy and convenient, while the remaining 12% responded neutrally.