Assessing the satisfaction of customers about quality service system at CGV cinema in ho chi minh city

RESEARCH PROJECT (BMBR5103) ASSESSING THE SATISFACTION OF CUSTOMERS ABOUT QUALITY SERVICE SYSTEM AT CGV CINEMA IN HO CHI MINH CITY STUDENT’S FULL NAME STUDENT ID INTAKE ADVISOR’S NAME & TITLE NGUYEN : LE NGOC THANH NGA : CGS00018488 : SEPTEMBER 2014 : ASSOC.PROF.DR PHAN DINH December 2015 Advisor’s assessment Advisor’s signature REASSURANCES I swear thesis with topic “ASSESSING THE SATISFACTION OF CUSTOMERS ABOUT QUALITY SERVICE SYSTEM AT CGV CINEMA IN HO CHI MINH CITY”purely research findings of myself and has not been published in any work of others During the implementation process thesis, I have taken seriously the research ethics rules; the results presented in the thesis is the research and personal survey children, all references used in my thesis are the explicit instructions, in accordance with regulations CONTENTS CHAPTER 1:OVERVIEW OF THESIS 1.1 REASONS OF CHOOSING TOPIC 1.2 OBJECTIVES 10 1.3 RESEARCH SUBJECT 10 1.4 RESEARCH SCOPE 10 1.5 THE METHODOLOGY 10 1.5.1 DATA 11 1.5.2 VARIABLE 11 1.5.3 HYPOTHESIS 12 1.5.4 MODEL 14 CHAPTER 2:LITERATURE REVIEW 16 2.1 THE CONCEPT OF SERVICE 16 2.2 QUALITY OF SERVICE 16 2.2.1 The basic characteristics of service 17 2.2.1.1 Invisibility 18 2.2.1.2 Heterogeneity 18 2.2.1.3 As of inseparable 18 2.2.1.4 As of not preserved 19 2.2.2 Quality of Service Measurement 19 2.2.3 Service quality model – SERVPERF MODEL 21 2.2.4 Price 24 2.2.5 Customer satisfaction 24 2.2.6 The difference between service quality and customer satisfaction 25 2.3 RESEARCHING OF TOPICS MODEL 26 2.4 SUMMARY 27 CHAPTER 3:METHODOLOGICAL 28 3.1 INTRODUCE 28 3.2 COURSE OF RESEARCHING 28 3.2.1 Description of the research process 28 3.2.2 Diagram of the research 31 32 3.3 RESEARCH PROPOSAL METHOD 33 3.3.1 RESEARCH MODEL 33 3.3.2 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS 34 3.3.2.1 Reliability and satisfaction customer 34 3.3.2.2 Response and customer satisfaction 34 3.3.2.3 Assurance and customer satisfaction 34 3.3.2.4 Empathy and customer satisfaction 35 3.3.2.5 Tangible and customer satisfaction 35 3.3.2.6 Price and customer satisfaction 35 3.4 MEASUREMENT SCALE CONTRUCTION 36 3.4.1 SERVICE QUALITY SCALE 36 3.4.2 THE SCALE OF PRICE 39 3.4.3 Customer satisfaction scale about service quality of CGV cinemas 40 3.4.4 Determining the accuracy and reliability of data 40 3.5 SUMMARY 43 CHAPTER 4:SITUATION OF GORUP ENTERTAINMENT CJ CGVAND ANALYZE RESEARCH RESULTS 45 4.1 OVERVIEW OF THE COMPANY 45 4.1.1 Company profile 45 4.1.2 The process of constitute and development of CGV 45 4.1.3 The organization structure 47 47 4.1.4 Functions and duties of the corporate structure 48 4.1.5 Career and mission of the company 50 4.1.6 Development orientation of the company in the future 50 4.2 OVERVIEW OF THE BUSINESS OPERATIONS OF CGV CINEMA IN HO CHI MINH BRANCH 51 Results of business activities 51 4.2.1 4.2.2 Some activities to enhance customer satisfaction by CGV Cinema 53 4.3 SURVEY DATA ANALYSIS 56 4.3.1 Introduction 56 4.3.2 Characteristics information of the survey sample 56 4.3.3 Statistics descriptive the average value (MEAN) 60 4.4 MEASUREMENT INSPECTION OF MODELS 65 4.4.1 Cronbach's Alpha inspection for the scales 66 4.4.2 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) 67 4.4.3 General research model 70 4.4.4 Pearson Correlation coefficients analysis 70 4.4.5 Regression analysis and testing the suitability of the model 72 4.4.6 Analysis of ANOVA variance 77 4.5 CONCLUSION 79 CHAPTER 5:SOLUTIONS AND RECOMEMDATIONS TO IMPROVE QUALITY OF SERVICE IN GROUP ENTERTAINMENT MULTIMEDIA CJ CGV VIETNAM 80 5.1 SOLUTIONS FOR BUSINESS OPERATIONS OF GROUP ENTERTAIMENT MULTIMEDIA CJ CGV VIETNAM 80 5.2 SOLUTIONS TO IMPROVE SERVICES SYSTEM AT CGV CINEMA 81 5.2.1 For tangible media elements (TAN) 81 5.2.2 For service pricing factors (PRI) 82 5.2.3 For reliability factor (REL) 84 5.2.4 For responsiveness factor (RES) 85 5.2.5 For empathy factor (EMP) 86 CONCLUSION 88 CUSTOMERS SURVEYS SAMPLE 89 QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEYS 89 ADDENDUM STATISTICAL DESCRIPTION AND "MEAN" AVERAGE VALUE 93 REFERENCES 120 LIST OF TABLES – FIGURES Figure 2.1 - Model of service quality SERVPERF Figure 2.2 - Model of customer satisfaction Zeithaml and CTG (2009) Figure 2.3 - research model is proposed in theory Figure 3.1 - Research Process Figure 3.2 - Research Proposal Method Figure 4.1 – General research model Table 3.1 - The scale of service quality components Megastar cinema CGV Table 3.2 – Service pricing scale Table 3.3 - Customer satisfaction scale about service quality Table 4.1 - Report business operations of CGV Cinema - Ho Chi Minh City Table 4.2 - Assess the level expectations of customers when they come cinema CGV Cinemas Table 4.3 – Mean values survey of "Reliability factor" Table 4.4 – Mean values survey of "Response factor" Table 4.5 – Mean values survey of "Assurance factor" Table 4.6 – Mean values survey of "Empathy factor" Table 4.7 – Mean values survey of "Tangible factor" Table 4.8 – Mean values survey of "Price factor" Table 4.9 – Mean values survey of "Satisfaction factor" Table 4.10 – Cronbach 's Alpha of factors Table 4.11 – The last results of EFA analysis Table 4.12 – Summary of coefficients when factor analysis EFA Table 4.13 – The table of corresponding factor analysis with the observed variables Table 4.14 –Pearson Correlationcoefficients analysis result Table 4.15 – Summary results of the first regression analysis Table 4.16 – Summary results of the second regression analysis Table 4.17 – Summary of the necessary elements to test the suitability of the model Table 4:18 - Table testing variances customer groups surveyed by gender, age group and level of going to the cinema Table 4:19 - Score Sig comparing differences in satisfaction of the customer groups surveyed by gender, age group and level going to the cinema Chart 4.1 - The first cinema choice when going to the movies Chart 4.2 - How often does customers go to the cinema CHAPTER OVERVIEW OF THESIS 1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT Nowadays, the economic has improved considerably The level of living is rising and that in parallel, their entertainment needs are pushed up The new entertainment forms appear constantly, but the traditional forms of entertainment still have their foothold as the cinema, the first major market for businesses Therefore, the level of competition in this market is very high, including Vietnam enterprises and foreign enterprises such as Galaxy (ThienNgan Company, Vietnam), CGV and Megastar (CGV Communication Co., Ltd., Korea Korea), Lotte Cinema (Lotte Cinema, South Korea), BHD (BinhHanh Dang Company, Vietnam)… These enterprises wants to hold market share in Vietnam entertainment will have to invest a lot in infrastructure, branding, product quality and service quality And the majority of businesses in this field not too skewed on infrastructure investment initially Which service quality and customer satisfaction, and one of the vital elements of any enterprise? Based on the importance of service quality and level of customer satisfaction, as well as hope to gain a strong foothold at home to the competitors at home and abroad So I have decided to choose the topic “ASSESSING THE SATISFACTION OF CUSTOMERS ABOUT QUALITY SERVICE SYSTEM AT CGV CINEMA IN HO CHI MINH CITY” To find out the weak points in the work of customer service as well as promote further strong points are available Analysis of the data has been to be able to make timely business strategy and the best fit for the business Scale Mean Scale Corrected Item- Cronbach's if Item Variance if Total Correlation Alpha if Item Deleted Item Deleted Deleted SAT1 11,69 1,934 ,547 ,804 SAT2 11,77 2,109 ,522 ,809 SAT3 11,67 1,905 ,722 ,718 SAT4 11,61 1,830 ,739 ,707 EFA Analysis The first EFA analysis result KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy ,795 Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx Chi-Square 2258,087 df 351 Sig ,000 Total Variance Explained Compon Initial Eigenvalues ent Extraction Sums of Rotation Sums Squared Loadings Squared Loadings of Tot % of Cumulat Tot % of Cumulat Tot % of Cumulat al Varian ive % al Varian ive % al Varian ive % ce ce ce 7,1 26,360 26,360 17 7,1 26,360 26,360 17 3,4 12,861 12,861 73 106 2,7 10,087 36,448 24 2,7 10,087 36,448 24 2,9 11,028 23,890 78 2,1 7,856 21 44,304 2,1 7,856 21 44,304 2,9 10,913 34,803 47 1,8 6,939 73 51,243 1,8 6,939 73 51,243 2,9 10,806 45,609 18 1,6 6,285 97 57,528 1,6 6,285 97 57,528 2,4 9,203 85 54,812 1,2 4,769 88 62,297 1,2 4,769 88 62,297 2,0 7,485 21 62,297 ,99 3,697 65,994 Rotated Component Matrixa Component REL5 ,842 REL3 ,804 REL1 ,706 REL4 ,673 REL2 ,649 RES1 ,823 RES5 ,814 RES4 ,767 RES2 ,651 RES3 ,483 107 EMP2 ,856 EMP5 ,830 EMP4 ,744 EMP1 ,705 EMP3 ,391 TAN4 ,812 TAN1 ,742 TAN5 ,735 TAN2 ,687 TAN3 ,623 ASS4 ,808 ASS3 ,661 ASS1 ,660 ASS2 ,641 PRI1 ,791 PRI2 ,768 PRI3 ,654 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization a Rotation converged in iterations The second EFA analysis result KMO and Bartlett's Test 108 Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy ,791 Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx Chi-Square 2188,271 df 325 Sig ,000 Total Variance Explained Compon Initial Eigenvalues ent Extraction Sums of Rotation Sums Squared Loadings Squared Loadings of Tot % of Cumulat Tot % of Cumulat Tot % of Cumulat al Varian ive % al Varian ive % al Varian ive % ce ce ce 6,9 26,775 26,775 62 6,9 26,775 26,775 62 3,4 13,262 13,262 48 2,6 10,219 36,994 57 2,6 10,219 36,994 57 2,9 11,293 24,555 36 2,0 8,050 93 45,044 2,0 8,050 93 45,044 2,9 11,153 35,707 00 1,8 7,110 49 52,154 1,8 7,110 49 52,154 2,7 10,624 46,331 62 1,6 6,444 75 58,598 1,6 6,444 75 58,598 2,4 9,537 80 55,868 1,2 4,952 87 63,550 1,2 4,952 87 63,550 1,9 7,682 97 63,550 ,93 3,578 67,128 Rotated Component Matrixa 109 Component REL5 ,835 REL3 ,800 REL1 ,693 REL4 ,681 REL2 ,665 EMP2 ,856 EMP5 ,828 EMP4 ,748 EMP1 ,708 EMP3 ,400 TAN4 ,816 TAN1 ,741 TAN5 ,734 TAN2 ,694 TAN3 ,613 RES1 ,810 RES5 ,795 RES4 ,788 RES2 ,670 ASS4 ,809 ASS3 ,669 110 ASS1 ,657 ASS2 ,647 PRI1 ,788 PRI2 ,780 PRI3 ,663 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization a Rotation converged in iterations The final EFA analysis result KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy ,786 Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx Chi-Square 2145,278 df 300 Sig ,000 Total Variance Explained Compon Initial Eigenvalues ent Extraction Sums of Rotation Sums Squared Loadings Squared Loadings of Tot % of Cumulat Tot % of Cumulat Tot % of Cumulat al Varian ive % al Varian ive % al Varian ive % ce ce ce 6,7 27,195 27,195 99 6,7 27,195 27,195 99 3,4 13,842 13,842 60 111 2,6 10,601 37,795 50 2,6 10,601 37,795 50 2,8 11,587 25,429 97 2,0 8,363 91 46,158 2,0 8,363 91 46,158 2,7 11,072 36,501 68 1,7 7,170 92 53,328 1,7 7,170 92 53,328 2,6 10,789 47,291 97 1,6 6,700 75 60,028 1,6 6,700 75 60,028 2,4 9,893 73 57,183 1,2 5,148 87 65,176 1,2 5,148 87 65,176 1,9 7,993 98 65,176 ,89 3,573 68,750 Rotated Component Matrixa Component REL5 ,837 REL3 ,801 REL1 ,698 REL4 ,683 REL2 ,666 TAN4 ,817 TAN1 ,744 TAN5 ,737 TAN2 ,694 112 TAN3 ,615 EMP2 ,859 EMP5 ,833 EMP4 ,747 EMP1 ,714 RES1 ,825 RES5 ,803 RES4 ,788 RES2 ,658 ASS4 ,813 ASS3 ,666 ASS1 ,660 ASS2 ,652 PRI1 ,790 PRI2 ,780 PRI3 ,662 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization a Rotation converged in iterations Pearson coefficient correlation analysis Correlations SAT SAT Pearson Correlation REL RES ASS EMP TAN PRI ,554** ,438** ,415** ,411** ,582** ,557** 113 Sig (2-tailed) N 172 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 172 172 172 172 172 172 Pearson Correlation ,554** REL Sig (2-tailed) N ,000 172 172 ,429** ,395** ,296** ,301** ,414** ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 172 172 172 172 172 Pearson Correlation ,438** ,429** RES Sig (2-tailed) N ,000 ,000 172 172 172 ,277** ,198** ,153* ,371** ,000 ,009 ,045 ,000 172 172 172 172 Pearson Correlation ,415** ,395** ,277** ASS Sig (2-tailed) N ,000 ,000 ,000 172 172 172 172 ,287** ,180* ,433** ,000 ,018 ,000 172 172 172 Pearson Correlation ,411** ,296** ,198** ,287** EMP Sig (2-tailed) N ,000 ,000 ,009 ,000 172 172 172 172 172 ,304** ,278** ,000 ,000 172 172 Pearson Correlation ,582** ,301** ,153* ,180* ,304** TAN Sig (2-tailed) N ,000 ,000 ,045 ,018 ,000 172 172 172 172 172 ,209** ,006 172 172 Pearson Correlation ,557** ,414** ,371** ,433** ,278** ,209** PRI Sig (2-tailed) N ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,006 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) Regression analysis The first result 114 Model Summaryb Model R ,795a R Square Adjusted Square ,632 ,619 R Std Error of the DurbinEstimate Watson ,27830 1,602 a Predictors: (Constant), PRI, TAN, EMP, RES, ASS, REL b Dependent Variable: SAT ANOVAa Model Sum of df Squares Mean Square F Sig 47,262 ,000b Regression 21,962 3,660 Residual 12,779 165 ,077 Total 34,741 171 a Dependent Variable: SAT b Predictors: (Constant), PRI, TAN, EMP, RES, ASS, REL Coefficientsa Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Coefficients B Beta Std Error (Constant) ,258 ,225 REL ,046 Sig Collinearity Statistics Tolerance VIF 1,149 ,252 ,154 ,196 3,377 ,001 ,662 1,510 115 RES ,113 ,041 ,149 2,771 ,006 ,767 1,303 ASS ,061 ,045 ,075 1,360 ,176 ,738 1,355 EMP ,071 ,035 ,105 2,009 ,046 ,822 1,217 TAN ,280 ,036 ,397 7,771 ,000 ,856 1,169 PRI ,232 ,048 ,276 4,887 ,000 ,700 1,429 a Dependent Variable: SHL The second result Model Summaryb Model R R Square ,792a ,628 Adjusted Square R Std Error Estimate ,617 of the DurbinWatson ,27901 1,657 a Predictors: (Constant), PRI, TAN, EMP, RES, REL b Dependent Variable: SAT ANOVAa Model Sum of Squares df Regression 21,819 Mean Square F 4,364 Residual 12,922 166 ,078 Total 34,741 171 Sig 56,058 ,000b a Dependent Variable: SAT b Predictors: (Constant), PRI, TAN, EMP, RES, REL 116 Coefficientsa Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Coefficients B Beta Std Error Sig Collinearity Statistics Tolerance VIF (Constant) ,333 ,218 1,522 ,130 REL ,167 ,045 ,212 3,718 ,000 ,690 1,449 RES ,116 ,041 ,153 2,839 ,005 ,769 1,300 EMP ,078 ,035 ,115 2,214 ,028 ,838 1,194 TAN ,281 ,036 ,397 7,764 ,000 ,856 1,169 PRI ,250 ,046 ,297 5,473 ,000 ,759 1,317 a Dependent Variable: SAT ANOVA Analysis – One Way ANOVA Based on gender Test of Homogeneity of Variances SAT Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig ,046 170 ,830 ANOVA SAT Sum of Squares df Between Groups ,048 Mean Square F ,048 Sig ,235 ,628 117 Within Groups 34,693 170 ,204 Total 34,741 171 Based on age Test of Homogeneity of Variances SAT Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig 1,709 169 ,184 ANOVA SAT Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Between Groups 1,052 ,526 Within Groups 33,689 169 ,199 Total 34,741 171 Sig 2,639 ,074 Based on how often you go to the cinema Test of Homogeneity of Variances SAT Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig 1,399 168 ,245 ANOVA SAT 118 Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Between Groups ,920 ,307 Within Groups 33,821 168 ,201 Total 34,741 171 Sig 1,523 ,210 119 REFERENCES Book - Hoang Trong - Chu Nguyen Mong Ngoc (2008), Data Analysis with SPSS episode 1.2, Publisher Statistics - Le World (2010), Marketing Management, Publishing House of Vietnam Education - Le Van Huy, Data processing with SPSS, 2007, Published by University of Economics Da Nang - Nguyen Dinh Tho (2011), Scientific Research Methods in Business, Labour and Social Publishing - Nguyen Minh Tuan, Ha Trong Quang, Textbook research data processing with SPSS, 2012, Published by the University Industry Ho Chi Minh City Documentation - Cronin, J., J and Taylor, S., A (1992), "Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and Extension", The Journal of Marrketing, Vol 56, No 3, pp 55-68 - V Zeithaml, A., Berry, L., L and Parasuraman, A (1996) "The behavioral Consequences of service quality" Journal of Marketing, Vol.60, pp 31- 46 Zeithaml, V., A., Bitner, J., M and Grembler, D., D (2009), Services Marketing, McGraw-Hill Website Website Group Entertainment Multimedia CJ CGV: http://www.cgv.vn 120 ... matching content to the study of the topic ? ?ASSESSING THE SATISFACTION OF CUSTOMERS ABOUT QUALITY SERVICE SYSTEM AT CGV CINEMA IN HO CHI MINH CITY? ?? First, Review of key issues related to the quality. .. business strategy and the best fit for the business 1.2 OBJECTIVES Define ? ?ASSESSING THE SATISFACTION OF CUSTOMERS ABOUT QUALITY SERVICE SYSTEM AT CGV CINEMA IN HO CHI MINH CITY? ?? through the. .. Advisor’s signature REASSURANCES I swear thesis with topic ? ?ASSESSING THE SATISFACTION OF CUSTOMERS ABOUT QUALITY SERVICE SYSTEM AT CGV CINEMA IN HO CHI MINH CITY? ??purely research findings of myself