1. TRADE SERVICE SATISFACTION SURVEY Mid term review Submitted to - By - Mr. CG Krishnan Abhishek Asthana Mr. Sriram Krishnamurthy SIBM Pune Mr. V. K. Anand

2. Agenda  Project brief  Research Methodology  Progress of the project  Survey results  Plan of Analysis  Dealer speak  Insights  Best practices (Competition)

3. Project brief  Objective of the report: To understand the current satisfaction levels of the Trade with the level of servicing provided by the PIL WSS  Scope of the project: To cover 200 Dealers in each of the selected cities including periphery & extension areas  Process to be adopted: Field visits to retail dealers in assigned area & interview & record feedback from these dealers in pre-designed format and analysis of the same to deduce trends and recommended corrective actions.

4. Progress of the Project  Areas covered:  Ghatkopar(E)  Ghatkopar (W)  Chembur  Borivali  Kandivali (E)  Mulund (E)  Mulund (W)  Total Dealers covered: 113  (Plywood: 52, H/W stores: 34, Others: 27)  Date: 20/4/2012 to 30/4/2012. Total: 9 working days.  Distributors covered:  Thakkar Devchand  Keyur Distributors  Sun enterprises  IM Distributors ASMs contacted:  Mr. Prajwal  Mr. Balkishan

5. Progress of the project  Areas to be covered in the next phase  Meera road/Bhayander  Dombivli  Kharghar/Kalamboli  Ullhasnagar  Meeting WSSs to find out the reasons of Scheme settlement delay  Detailed Analysis using the SPSS tool of the survey results  Final Report presentation and submission

6. Results Overall Satisfaction rating with Pidilite Avg: 3.03/4 1= Very Dissatisfied 2 = Little dissatisfied 3 = Little satisfied 4= Very Satisfied

8. Confidence of scheme settlement Avg: 1.52/4 1= Very Dissatisfied 2 = Little dissatisfied 3 = Little satisfied 4= Very Satisfied

9. Scheme design & satisfaction Avg: 1.81 1= Very Dissatisfied 2 = Little dissatisfied 3 = Little satisfied 4= Very Satisfied

10. Plan of Analysis  Tool: SPSS  Class wise/Region wise satisfaction rating  Anova testing to find out difference in satisfaction levels based on Outlet type and Class.  T-tests to find out if there is a difference in the order servicing levels based on Distance from the distributor  Correlation between the dichotomous variable (Keeps other brands or not) and the satisfaction levels

11. Concerns  Scheme settlement takes 60+ days. Some of them have accepted it as their fate  Scheme communication is not written, mostly done verbally. Should give out pamphlets  Urgent order servicing. Dealer has to send their people to get the order.  Stock availability is an issue. Orders come in parts.  Price list not updated

12. Suggestions  Sending scheme details to the dealer directly on a printed letterhead of the company  Sending SMSs mentioning scheme details at the beginning of the month  Updated price list should be mailed with the scheme details  Periodic surveys (like this one) should be conducted to skip hierarchy and finding out issues

13. Dealer speak  “September CN note not received yet. Had to follow up for orders delivery a lot. ”  “Customers demand Fevicol, so we keep it despite less margins”  “No schemes in writing. Scheme communication issues. Scheme settlement is really late”  “Delivery issues (Ordered Marine; Got SH). Pending orders not serviced, Variable credit period on the basis of Class A/B/C). Scheme communication is complex and settlement takes forever”  “No incentives for small dealers, More parties and events should happen”  “Bonus point calculation is complex”

14. Best practices  Asian Paints  Asian paints has a direct servicing model  Has a dedicated call centre for taking orders and queries redressal  Dealers really satisfied with the service Century Ply:  Sends out a Pamphlet to the dealer. on the Company letterhead with scheme details for the month  Scheme communication problems are minimum