Keerthi Project
Keerthi Project
PG DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Project Report On
                                         SUBMITTED BY
                                             Keerthana. V
                                               2nd M.com
                                     JSS College for Women
                                                Mysuru
                                            Suma.S.M
                             Assistant Professor of Commerce
                                     JSS college for Women
                                                 Mysuru
                                         SUBMITTED TO
                            PG Department of Commerce
                                 JSS College for Women
                                                 Mysuru
2022 – 2023
                                                       i
                                        JSS MAHAVIDYAPEETHA
        J S S COLLEGE FOR WOMEN(AUTONOMOUS)
              (An Autonomous College of University of Mysore: Re - Accredited by NAAC at ‘A’ Grade with CGPA of 3.07)
PG DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
DECLARATION
        I also declare that this project report is not submitted to any college / University/
Institution for the award of any degree /diploma/certificate.
Place: Mysuru
Date:
                                                                ii
                                        JSS MAHAVIDYAPEETHA
         J S S COLLEGE FOR WOMEN(AUTONOMOUS)
          (An Autonomous College of University of Mysore: Re - Accredited by NAAC at ‘A’ Grade with CGPA of 3.07)
                     SARASWATHIPURAM, MYSURU – 570 009
PG DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
CERTIFICATE
                                                           iii
                                        JSS MAHAVIDYAPEETHA
         J S S COLLEGE FOR WOMEN(AUTONOMOUS)
          (An Autonomous College of University of Mysore: Re - Accredited by NAAC at ‘A’ Grade with CGPA of 3.07)
                     SARASWATHIPURAM, MYSURU – 570 009
PG DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
CERTIFICATE
                                                          iv
                                     JSS MAHAVIDYAPEETHA
         J S S COLLEGE FOR WOMEN(AUTONOMOUS)
    (An Autonomous College of University of Mysore: Re - Accredited by NAAC at ‘A’ Grade with CGPA of 3.07)
                           Saraswathipuram, Mysuru – 570 009
PG DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
CERTIFICATE
                                                      v
vi
                              ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
       This study has the co – operation, assistance and valuable time of the following
respectable persons. I express my sincere gratitude through this acknowledgment to all
those who have contributed directly and indirectly to this study.
       My great full thanks to the entire staff of Nissan Motors, Mysuru and customers
who have provided the information on the working of the company, which has helped
me to complied data to be presented in the form of suitable project on this report.
                                          vii
               CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION 1-4
BIBLIOGRAPHY 77
                       viii
 CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION
“A Study on Consumer Satisfaction towards Nissan Cars and Service Provided by Nissan Motors”
Introduction
 fully-electric lineup is the Nissan LEAF, the No. 2 top-selling electric car globally, just
 behind the Tesla Model 3.
         The study on consumer satisfaction helps to know about who are the customers,
 what they want, how they use and react to the product. Consumers play an important
 role and are essential in keeping a product or service relevant; therefore, it is in the best
 interest of the business to ensure customer satisfaction and build customer loyalty. The
 wants of the consumers are carefully studied by conducting survey on consumer
 satisfaction. The study also helps to know about various marketing variables such as
 price and product features. This study will help to gain knowledge about the influence
 of consumer satisfaction towards Nissan car.
        To study the consumer satisfaction towards Nissan cars & service provided by
         Honnasiri Nissan Motors.
         Data collection is most essential aspect of any research because the whole result
 of research depends on the data and information.
Sources of data:
 Primary data: The scope of the study is restricted to the consumer satisfaction towards
 Nissan cars. The four wheelers have become necessity in the modern life. So every
 person wants to have good motor cars which gives them better satisfaction with regard
 to fuel consumption, this report involves the attempt to persue the consumer attitudes
 towards Nissan cars in Mysuru area only. .
 Secondary data: Secondary data used in the study were collected from journals,
 magazines, websites, e-journals, books, etc,
Sampling design:
Sampling tools:
         To draw the inference, data is analysed with the help of statistical tools, like
 simple percentage analysis, ranking, tabulation method & graphical presentation.
         The study was related to consumer satisfaction towards Nissan cars. The scope
 of the study is confined to Mysuru & Honnasiri Nissan.
Limitations
        Because of time constraints of 3 months, this study confines only to Mysore city
         and it was not possible to make extensive study
 Chapter-4: Data Analysis & Interpretation: It covers tables, graphs and inference
 drawn according to data collected.
Industry : Automotive
DAT line :
Kenjiro Den
Rokuro Aoyama
Meitaro Takeuchi
Yoshisuke Aikawa
William R.Gorham
Kanagawa prefecture
Japan
Products : Automobiles
Luxury vehicles
Commerical vehicles
Outboard motors
Forklift trucks
Divisions : Nissan
Infinti
Nismo
Datsun (discontinued)
Subsidiaries : Transportation :
 Nissan Shatai(43%)
 Mitsubishi Motors(34%)
 NMKV(50%)
Other :
 Nissan Techno
 Autech
 Jacto
International
 Nissan Australia
 Nissan Iberica
 Nissan India
 Nissan Indonesia
 Nissan Philippines
 Nissan UK
 Nissan USA
Website : www.nissan-global.com
History :
Datsun Type 11
         It was renamed to Kaishinsha Motorcar Co., Ltd. in 1918, and again to DAT
 Jidosha & Co., Ltd. (DAT Motorcar Co.) in 1925. DAT Motors built trucks in addition
 to the DAT and Datsun passenger cars. The vast majority of its output were trucks, due
 to an almost non-existent consumer market for passenger cars at the time, and disaster
 recovery efforts as a result of the 1923 Great Kanto earthquake. Beginning in 1918, the
 first DAT trucks were produced for the military market. At the same time, Jitsuyo
 Jidosha Co., Ltd. (jitsuyo means practical use or utility) produced small trucks using
 parts, and materials imported from the United States.
         In 1926, the Tokyo-based DAT Motors merged with the Osaka-based Jitsuyo
 Jidosha Co., Ltd (Jitsuyo Jidosha Seizo Kabushiki-Gaisha) a.k.a. Jitsuyo Jidosha
 Seizo (established 1919 as a Kubota subsidiary) to become DAT Jidosha Seizo Co., Ltd
 Automobile Manufacturing Co., Ltd. , DAT (Jidosha Seizo Kabushiki-Gaisha) in Osaka
 until 1932. From 1923 to 1925, the company produced light cars and trucks under the
 name of Lila. In 1929, DAT Automobile Manufacturing Inc. merged with a separated
 part of the manufacturing business of IHI Corporation to become Automobile Industries
 Co., Ltd.
         In 1931, DAT came out with a new smaller car, called the Datsun Type 11, the
 first "Datson", meaning "Son of DAT". Later in 1933, after Nissan Group zaibatsu took
 control of DAT Motors, the last syllable of Datson was changed to "sun", because "son"
 also means "loss" in Japanese, hence the name "Datsun".
         In 1933, the company name was Nipponized to Jidosha-Seizo Co., Ltd. (Jidosha
 Seizo Kabushiki-Gaisha, "Automobile Manufacturing Share Company") and was
 moved to Yokohama.
         The zaibatsu eventually grew to include 74 firms and became the fourth-largest
 in Japan during World War II.
         In 1931, DAT Jidosha Seizo became affiliated with Tobata Casting and was
 merged into Tobata Casting in 1933. As Tobata Casting was a Nissan company, this
 was the beginning of Nissan's automobile manufacturing.
         In 1940, the first knockdown kits were shipped to Dowa Jidosha Kogyo (Dowa
 Automobile), one of MHID's companies, for assembly. In 1944, the head office was
 moved to Nihonbashi, Tokyo, and the company name was changed to Nissan Heavy
 Industries, Ltd., which the company kept through 1949.
         In his 1986 book The Reckoning, David Halberstam states "In terms of
 technology, Gorham was the founder of the Nissan Motor Company" and that "young
 Nissan engineers who had never met him spoke of him as a god and could describe in
 detail his years at the company and his many inventions."
         From 1934, Datsun began to build Austin 7s under license. This operation
 became the greatest success of Austin's overseas licensing of its Seven and marked the
 beginning of Datsun's international success.
         In 1952, Nissan entered into a legal agreement with Austin, for Nissan to
 assemble 2,000 Austins from imported partially assembled sets and sell them in Japan
 under the Austin trademark. The agreement called for Nissan to make all Austin parts
 locally within three years, a goal Nissan met. Nissan produced and marketed Austins
 for seven years. The agreement also gave Nissan the rights to use Austin patents, which
 Nissan used in developing its own engines for its Datsun line of cars. In 1953, British-
 built Austins were assembled and sold, but by 1955, the Austin A50 – completely built
 by Nissan and featuring a new 1489 cc engine — was on the market in Japan. Nissan
 produced 20,855 Austins from 1953 to 1959.
         Nissan leveraged the Austin patents to further develop its own modern engine
 designs beyond what Austin's A- and B-family designs offered. The apex of the Austin-
 derived engines was the new design A series engine in 1966. In 1967, Nissan introduced
 its new highly advanced four-cylinder overhead cam (OHC) Nissan L engine, which
 while similar to Mercedes-Benz OHC designs was a totally new engine designed by
 Nissan. This engine powered the new Datsun 510, which gained Nissan respect in the
 worldwide sedan market. Then, in 1969, Nissan introduced the Datsun 240Z sports car
 which used a six-cylinder variation of the L series engine, developed under Nissan
 Machinery (Nissan Koki Co., Ltd.) in 1964, a former remnant of another auto
 manufacturer Kurogane. The 240Z was an immediate sensation and lifted Nissan to
 world-class status in the automobile market.
         During the Korean War, Nissan was a major vehicle producer for the U.S.
 Army. After the Korean War ended, significant levels of anti-communist sentiment
 existed in Japan. The union that organized Nissan's workforce was strong and militant.
 Nissan was in financial difficulties, and when wage negotiations came, the company
 took a hard line. Workers were locked out, and several hundred were fired. The
 Japanese government and the U.S. occupation forces arrested several union leaders.
 The union ran out of strike funds and was defeated. A new labor union was formed,
 with Shioji Ichiro one of its leaders. Ichiro had studied at Harvard University on a U.S.
 government scholarship. He advanced an idea to trade wage cuts against saving 2,000
 jobs. Ichiro's idea was made part of a new union contract that prioritized productivity.
 Between 1955 and 1973, Nissan "expanded rapidly on the basis of technical advances
 supported – and often suggested – by the union." Ichiro became president of
 the Confederation of Japan Automobile Workers' Unions and "the most influential
 figure in the right wing of the Japanese labour movement."
         In 1966, Nissan merged with the Prince Motor Company, bringing more
 upmarket cars, including the Skyline and Gloria, into its selection. The Prince name
 was eventually abandoned, and successive Skylines and Glorias bore the Nissan name.
 "Prince" was used at the Japanese Nissan dealership "Nissan Prince Shop" until 1999,
 when "Nissan Red Stage" replaced it. Nissan Red Stage itself has been replaced as of
 2007. The Skyline lives on as the G Series of Infiniti.
Miss Fairlady
 first class of Nissan Miss Fairladys, modeled after "Datsun Demonstrators" from the
 1930s who introduced cars. The Fairlady name was used as a link to the popular
 Broadway play My Fair Lady of the era. Miss Fairladys became the marketers of
 the Datsun Fairlady 1500.
         In April 2008, 14 more Miss Fairlady candidates were added, for a total of 45
 Nissan Miss Fairlady pageants (22 in Ginza, 8 in Sapporo, 7 in Nagoya, 7 in Fukuoka).
         In April 2012, 7 more Miss Fairlady candidates were added, for a total of 48
 Nissan Miss Fairlady pageants (26 in Ginza, 8 in Sapporo, 7 in Nagoya, 7 in Fukuoka).
         In April 2013, 6 more Miss Fairlady candidates were added to Ginza showroom,
 for a total of 27 48th Ginza Nissan Miss Fairlady pageants.
Foreign expansion
         In the wake of the 1973 oil crisis, consumers worldwide, especially in the
 lucrative U.S. market, began turning to high-quality small economy cars. To meet the
 growing demand for its new Nissan Sunny, the company built new factories in Mexico
 (Nissan Mexicana was established in the early-1960s and commenced manufacturing
 in 1966 at the Cuernavaca assembly facility, making it Nissan's first North American
 assembly plant), Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan, United States (Nissan Motor
 Manufacturing Corporation USA was established in 1980) and South Africa. The
 "Chicken Tax" of 1964 placed a 25% tax on commercial vans imported to the United
 States. In response, Nissan, Toyota Motor Corp. and Honda Motor Co. began building
 plants in the U.S. in the early-1980s. Nissan's initial assembly plant Smyrna assembly
 plant (which broke ground in 1980) at first built only trucks such as
 the 720 and Hardbody, but has since expanded to produce several car and SUV lines,
 including the Altima, Maxima, Rogue, Pathfinder, Infiniti QX60 and LEAF all-electric
 car. The addition of mass-market automobiles was in response to the 1981 Voluntary
 Export Restraints imposed by the U.S. Government. An engine plant in Decherd,
 Tennessee followed, most recently a second assembly plant was established in Canton,
 Mississippi. In 1970, Teocar was created, which was a Greek assembly plant created in
 cooperation with Theoharakis. It was situated in Volos, Greece and its geographical
 location was perfect as the city had a major port. The plant started production in 1980,
 assembling Datsun pick-up trucks and continuing with the Nissan Cherry and Sunny
 automobiles. Until May 1995 170,000 vehicles were made, mainly for Greece.
         By the early-1980s, Nissan (Datsun) had long been the best selling Japanese
 brand in Europe. In order to overcome export tariffs and delivery costs to its European
 customers, Nissan contemplated establishing a plant in Europe. Nissan tried to convert
 the Greek plant into one manufacturing cars for all European countries.However, due
 to issues with the Greek government not only did that not happen but the plant itself
 was closed. A joint venture with Italy's then state-owned Alfa Romeo was also entered
 in 1980, leading to Italian production of the Nissan Cherry and an Alfa-badged and
 motorized version, the Alfa Romeo Arna. After an extensive review, Nissan decided to
 go it alone instead. The City of Sunderland in the north east of England was chosen for
 its skilled workforce and its location near major ports. The plant was completed in 1986
 as the subsidiary Nissan Motor Manufacturing (UK) Ltd. By 2007, it was producing
 400,000 vehicles per year, landing it the title of the most productive plant in Europe.
Renault–Nissan–Mitsubishi Alliance
         Under CEO Ghosn's "Nissan Revival Plan" (NRP), the company has rebounded
 in what many leading economists consider to be one of the most spectacular corporate
 turnarounds in history, catapulting Nissan to record profits and a dramatic revitalization
 of both its Nissan and Infiniti model line-ups. Ghosn has been recognized in Japan for
 the company's turnaround in the midst of an ailing Japanese economy. Ghosn and the
 Nissan turnaround were featured in Japanese manga and popular culture. His
 achievements in revitalizing Nissan were noted by the Japanese government, which
 awarded him the Japan Medal with Blue Ribbon in 2004.
         In late-July 2019, Nissan announced it would lay off 12,500 employees over the
 next 3 years, citing a 95% year on year net income fall. Hiroto Saikawa, CEO at the
 time, confirmed the majority of those cuts would be plant workers.
         In May 2020, Nissan announced that the company would cut production
 capacity by 20% due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In mid-2020, the company
 announced it would shut down factories in Indonesia and Spain, and would exit the
 South Korean car market. Nissan announced that the Infiniti brand will be pulled out
 from South Korea as well alongside the Nissan brand by December due to worsening
 business environment amidst the pandemic and the 2019 boycott of Japanese products
 in South Korea. Nissan announced that service centers will be managed to provide after-
 sales services such as vehicle quality assurance and parts management for eight
 years. In November 2020, Nissan announced a $421 million loss in the last quarter due
 to the COVID-19 pandemic and the scandal concerning Ghosn. According to a
 spokesperson of Nissan North America, the company had suffered from a strategy of
 "volume at any cost", which has been attributed by analysts to Ghosn.
         In January 2023, Renault said it intends to transfer almost 30% of its controlling
 stake in Nissan to a French trust (pending approval by both companies), reducing its
 shares with voting rights to a minority 15% and, in doing so, making Nissan shares in
 Renault to gain voting rights. The shareholding and voting ratio of both companies is
 set to be fixed in the future. The agreement also includes Nissan investing in Ampere
 (a proposed Renault subsidiary for electric cars) and projects in various markets. In
 February 2023, both companies approved the going-ahead for the shareholding
 changes. Final details and regulatory clearances for the transaction are set to be
 completed by the first quarter of 2023 and it would be done by the fourth quarter. The
 companies also approved joint projects and Nissan's Ampere investment.
Nissan technologies
         In 1982, Nissan's first final assembly robots were installed in the Murayama
 plant, where the then-new March/Micra was assembled. In 1984, the Zama plant began
 to be robotized; this automation process then continued throughout Nissan's factories.
         Nissan electric vehicles have been produced intermittently since 1946. In 2010,
 the Nissan Leaf plug-in battery electric vehicle was introduced; it was the world's most
 sold plug-in electric car for nearly a decade. It was preceded by the Altra and
 the Hypermini. Until surpassed by Tesla, Nissan was the world's largest electric vehicle
 (EV) manufacturer, with global sales of more than 320,000 all-electric vehicles as of
 April 2018. In 2022, it was announced that Nissan was intending to create solid-state
 batteries for electric vehicles.
         In Australia, between 1989 and 1992, Nissan Australia shared models with Ford
 Australia under a government-backed rationalisation scheme known as the Button Plan,
 with a version of the Nissan Pintara being sold as the Ford Corsair and a version of
 the Ford Falcon as the Nissan Ute. A variant of the Nissan Patrol was sold as the Ford
 Maverick during the 1988–94 model years.
         In North America, Nissan partnered with Ford from 1993 to 2002 to market the
 Ohio-built Mercury Villager and the Nissan Quest. The two minivans were virtually
 identical aside from cosmetic differences. In 2002, Nissan and Ford announced the
 discontinuation of the arrangement.
         In Europe, Nissan and Ford Europe partnered to produce the Nissan Terrano
 II and the badge-engineered Ford Maverick, a mid-size SUV produced at the Nissan
 Motor Iberica S.A (NMISA) plant in Barcelona, Spain. The Maverick/Terrano II was a
 popular vehicle sold throughout Europe and Australasia. It was also sold in Japan as
 a captive import, with the Nissan model marketed as the Nissan Mistral.
Volkswagen
Alfa Romeo
         From 1983 to 1987, Nissan cooperated with Alfa Romeo to build the Arna. The
 goal was for Alfa to compete in the family hatchback market segment, and for Nissan
 to establish a foothold in the European market. After Alfa Romeo's takeover by Fiat,
 both the car and cooperation were discontinued.
General Motors
 in Barcelona, Spain; while the low roof version is built at Vauxhall Motors/Opel's Luton
 plant in Bedfordshire, UK.
LDV
         The Renault-Nissan Alliance has evolved over the years to Renault holding
 43.4% of Nissan shares, while Nissan holds 15% of Renault shares. The alliance itself
 is incorporated as the Renault-Nissan B.V., founded on 28 March 2002 under Dutch
 law. Renault-Nissan B.V. is equally owned by Renault and Nissan.
         On 7 April 2010, Daimler AG exchanged a 3.1% share of its holdings for 3.1%
 from both Nissan and Renault. This triple alliance allows for the increased sharing of
 technology and development costs, encouraging global cooperation and mutual
 development.
 term controlling shareholder of AvtoVAZ, Russia's largest car company and owner of
 the country's biggest selling brand, Lada. The takeover was completed in June 2014,
 and the two companies of the Renault-Nissan Alliance took a combined 67.1% stake of
 Alliance Rostec, which in turn acquired a 74.5% of AvtoVAZ, thereby giving Renault
 and Nissan indirect control over the Russian manufacturer. Ghosn was appointed
 chairman of the board of AvtoVAZ on 27 June 2013. In September 2017, Nissan sold
 its AvtoVAZ stake to Renault for €45 million.
          Taken together, in 2013 the Renault–Nissan Alliance sold one in ten cars
 worldwide, and would be the world's fourth largest automaker with sales of 8,266,098
 units.
             In 2003, Nissan and Dongfeng Motor Group formed a 50:50 joint venture
              with the name Dongfeng Motor Co., Ltd. (DFL). The company calls itself
              "China's first automotive joint venture enterprise with a complete series of
              trucks, buses, light commercial vehicles and passenger vehicles," and "the
              largest joint-venture project of its scale."
             Together with Mitsubishi Motors, Nissan develops mini cars which are
              produced at Mitsubishi's Mizushima plant in Kurashiki, Okayama, Japan
              under the NMKV joint venture. In May 2016 Nissan bought a controlling
              stake in Mitsubishi Motors for an estimated US$2.3 billion.
Trucks
Nissan Cabstar
          Nissan Cabstar (Nissan Kyabusuta) is the name used in Japan for two lines of
 pickup trucks and light commercial vehicles sold by Nissan and built by UD Nissan
 Diesel, a Volvo AB company and by Renault-Nissan Alliance for the European market.
 The name originated with the 1968 Datsun Cabstar, but this was gradually changed
 over to "Nissan" badging in the early 1980s. The lighter range (1-1.5 tons) replaced the
 earlier Cabstar and Homer, while the heavier Caball and Clipper were replaced by the
 2–4 ton range Atlas (Nissan Atorasu). The nameplate was first introduced in December
 1981. The Cabstar is known also as the Nissan Cabstar, Renault Maxity and Samsung
 SV110 depending on the location. The range has been sold across the world. It shares
 its platform with the Nissan Caravan.
Nissan Titan
          The Nissan Titan was introduced in 2004, as a full-size pickup truck produced
 for the North American market, the truck shares the stretched Nissan F-Alpha platform
 with the Nissan Armada and Infiniti QX56 SUVs. It was listed by Edmunds.com as the
 best full-size truck. The second-generation Titan was revealed at the 2015 North
 American International Auto Show as a 2016 model year vehicle.
Electric vehicles
         Nissan introduced its first battery electric vehicle, the Nissan Altra at the Los
 Angeles International Auto Show on 29 December 1997. Unveiled in 2009, the EV-
 11 prototype electric car was based on the Nissan Tiida (Versa in North America), with
 the conventional gasoline engine replaced with an all-electric drivetrain.
         In 2010, Nissan introduced the Nissan LEAF as the first mass-market, all-
 electric vehicle launched globally. As of March 2014, the Nissan Leaf was the world's
 best selling highway-capable all-electric car ever. Global sales totaled 100,000 Leafs
 by mid January 2014, representing a 45% market share of worldwide pure electric
 vehicles sold since 2010. Global Leaf sales passed the 200,000 unit milestone in
 December 2015, and the Leaf continued ranking as the all-time best selling all-electric
 car.
         In June 2016, Nissan announced it will introduce its first range extender car in
 Japan before March 2017. The series plug-in hybrid will use a new hybrid system,
 dubbed e-Power, which debuted with the Nissan Gripz concept crossover showcased at
 the September 2015 Frankfurt Auto Show. As of August 2016, Nissan electric vehicles
 were sold in 48 world markets. Nissan global electric vehicle sales passed 275,000 units
 in December 2016.
         In 2018 Nissan sold its battery unit AESC to Envision in order to focus on the
 production of vehicles. The second-generation Leaf was launched by Nissan in Japan
 in 2018. By December 2020, 10 years after its introduction, cumulative global
 deliveries had reached 500,000 Leaf cars.
         In 2023, Nissan announced its intent to produce electric vehicles with solid-state
 batteries by 2028.
Autonomous cars
         Nissan autonomous car prototype technology was fitted on a Nissan Leaf all-
 electric car.
         In August 2013 Nissan announced its plans to launch several driverless cars by
 2020. The company is building a dedicated autonomous driving proving ground in
 Japan, to be completed in 2014. Nissan installed its autonomous car technology in
 a Nissan Leaf all-electric car for demonstration purposes. The car was demonstrated at
 Nissan 360 test drive event held in California in August 2013. In September 2013, the
 Leaf fitted with the prototype Advanced Driver Assistance System was granted a
 license plate that allows it to drive on Japanese public roads. The testing car will be
 used by Nissan engineers to evaluate how its in-house autonomous driving software
 performs in the real world. Time spent on public roads will help refine the car's software
 for fully automated driving. The autonomous Leaf was demonstrated on public roads
 for the first time at a media event held in Japan in November 2013. The Leaf drove on
 the Sagami Expressway in Kanagawa Prefecture, near Tokyo. Nissan vice
 chairman Toshiyuki Shiga and the prefecture's governor, Yuji Kuroiwa, rode in the car
 during the test.
Non-automotive products
         Nissan has also had a number of ventures outside the automotive industry, most
 notably the Tu–Ka mobile phone service (est. 1994), which was sold to DDI and Japan
 Telecom (both now merged into KDDI) in 1999. Nissan offers a subscription-
 based telematics service in select vehicles to drivers in Japan, called CarWings. Nissan
 also owns Nissan Marine, a joint venture with Tohatsu Corp that produces motors for
 smaller boats and other maritime equipment.
         Nissan also built solid rocket motors for orbital launch vehicles such as
 the Lambda 4S and M-V. The aerospace and defense division of Nissan was sold to IHI
 Corporation in 2000.
Marketing activities
         Nismo is the motorsports division of Nissan, founded in 1984. Nismo cars have
 participated in the All Japan Sports Prototype Championship, Super GT, IMSA GT
 Championship,       World     Sportscar    Championship,      FIA     World     Endurance
 Championship, Supercars Championship and Blancpain GT Series and British Touring
 car Championship. Also, they were featured at the World Series by Nissan from 1998
 to 2004.
Nissan sponsored the Los Angeles Open golf tournament from 1987 to 2007.
         Beginning in 2015, Nissan became the naming rights sponsor for Nissan
 Stadium, the home of the Tennessee Titans and Tennessee State University football
 teams in Nashville.[141] Nissan also became the official sponsor of the Heisman
 Trophy and UEFA Champions League. Since 2019, Nissan has been the naming rights
 sponsor for Nissan Arena, the home of the Brisbane Bullets basketball team
 and Queensland Firebirds netball team in Brisbane, Australia.
Nissan Magnite
Type : Subsidiary
Founded: 2005
Headquaters : Chennai,India
Products : Automobiles
Website : nissan.in
          Nissan Motor India Pvt Ltd (NMIPL) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Nissan
 Motor Co. Ltd Japan. The company was incorporated in 2005 and offers hatchback,
 MUV, SUV and sedans in India. Nissan in India has a portfolio of two brands, Nissan
 and Datsun. In February 2008, Nissan, together with its global alliance partner Renault
 signed a MoU with Government of Tamil Nadu to set up a manufacturing plant at
 Oragadam, near Chennai with an investment of INR 45 billion over a period of 7 years.
 On 17 March 2010, the Renault-Nissan alliance plant was inaugurated in a record time
 of 21 months since its ground breaking ceremony in June 2008.
Honnasiri Nisssan
        Since inception Honnasiri Group has emerged as one of the leading automobile
 dealerships having Business units at Bangalore, Mysore, Hassan & Tumkur. Along with
 Automobile the group is also engaged in Construction & Civil.
HD Infrastructure:
         Dealership for Nissan & Datsun cars in Mysore, M/s Honnassiri Motors India
 Private Limited (HMIPL) got incorporated on 16th December, 2011. The company is
 managed by Mr. Sunil Gowda who is the Managing Director and Mr. Lakshmikantha
 who is the Director.
H. D. Motors:
         H.D. Motors Partnership Firm started operations on 20th December, 2014 and is
 owned by Mr. Lakshmikantha and Mr. Sunil Gowda. Acting as a Principal Dealer for
 Mahindra & Mahindra and Ford vehicles, H. D. Motors caters to customers both in
 Personal & Commercial segment in and around Tumkur District.
         Starting its operations on 21st May 2015 in Hassan the dealership caters to sales
 and service of Honda Two-Wheeler. Mr. Sunil Gowda is a partner of Sri VSL Motors
 LLP.
H. D. Motors LLP:
Other Business:
      HEALTH CARE: We also run a health club in Mysore, which has up to 300
         members.
 Construction
 Automobile
 Health Care
 Education
 Honnasiri future goal : 500 Crore Turnover target and Our aim is to give best
 service in Automobile Industry
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
“A Study on Consumer Satisfaction towards Nissan Cars and Service Provided by Nissan Motors”
Consumer satisfaction :
 Reviews
         Once the customer selects the product or service, the customer will start
          evaluating the actual experience against the expected one. This is where a trial
          period and a well thought out onboarding process make a difference for high
          ticket products and especially for low ticket products with low stickiness.
          The customer satisfaction definitions explained so far do not factor in some key
 parameters — like price, for instance. So, Zeithaml and Bitner went ahead and
 developed a customer satisfaction model that not only includes price but also personal
 factor
         Quality and price are pretty much in control of the product companies or service
 providers. But how does one take stock of situational and personal factors? This is
 where building user personas come in handy, both for B2B and B2C players.
         Low customer satisfaction scores are important, too. They can reveal customer
 pain points and provide data-backed insights on how to improve your product, service,
 and overall customer experience.
         And considering 79 percent of people in the United States use social media,
 sharing is easier than ever before. If a customer has a bad experience with your
 company, they can broadcast it to millions of people before they’re even out the door.
 Example: A customer makes a Twitter thread about their poor experience with your
 company, leading their followers to also distrust your brand. To help save the
 interaction, respond to the customer as quickly as possible. Apologize for the error and
 ask them to direct message you so you can get more information and remedy the
 situation.
         Customer satisfaction benchmarks and metrics don’t just help you gauge how
 your audience is feeling—they also tell you how your support team is doing.
        Initial response time: In our CX Trends Report, respondents said that long wait
         times were the most frustrating part of bad customer service. This metric can
         help you identify pain points in your team’s ability to respond promptly.
        Resolution time: If it’s taking your support agents hours to resolve issues that
         could be dealt with swiftly, it might be time to tweak your internal processes.
         Don’t just strive to respond quickly—resolve quickly, too.
        Number of transfers: Few things are more frustrating than being transferred to
         a new agent and repeating your issue all over again. If transfer occurrence drops,
         customer satisfaction should rise.
         Considering our report found that fast issue resolution was the No. 1 aspect of
 good customer service, your team’s efficiency in those three areas directly impacts
 customer satisfaction.
 Example: If your negative reviews mainly revolve around agent response time, you
 may want to consider training employees on how to deliver quicker support. Use
 software with built-in analytics to observe how well your support team serves
 customers.
         How do you know if your customer service is driving customer loyalty? There
 are two primary ways to find out:
        Conduct polls to gauge buyers’ excitement and likeliness to tell others about
         your brand.
         These methods allow you to get input directly from your target market while
 also seeing how their words compare to their actions.
 Example: Customers who repeatedly experience good service in your store are more
 likely to come back and also encourage their friends to visit.
         Satisfied customers are not only more likely to remain loyal and stick around
 but they’re also more likely to increase your bottom line. According to our CX Trends
 Report, more than 90 percent of consumers will spend more with companies that offer
 streamlined customer experiences.
 Example: Even if a coffee shop around the corner is more convenient, customers will
 be more likely to walk to (and spend money at) a shop that gives them better, more
 personalized service.
         Great customer service isn’t just important for supporting existing customers;
 it’s key to attracting new ones, too. Nowadays, consumers expect premium service to
 be built-in throughout the customer journey—from the first sales or marketing
 interaction to any support they need down the road.
         The benefits of focusing on customer satisfaction are clear. But actually making
 customers happy can take some trial and error. The key is persistence. Always aim to
 go above and beyond for customers, and lean on other departments to help boost your
 customer experience.
         Become a student of your customer feedback. Do not just collect it: Analyse it
 and apply it to what your customers are saying. Commit to learning about buyers’ pain
 points and then make a plan to alleviate them in ways that set you apart from
 competitors.
         A great way to do this is to use Zendesk’s feedback feature. The tool includes
 analytics for agent performance and customer surveys, so you can study complaints and
 compliments regarding your services.
         Even without a CRM like Zendesk, you can still keep close tabs on customer
 feedback. Social media and online review boards are especially good places to monitor
 buyer attitudes. Search for mentions of your brand name or your dedicated hashtags on
 social sites to see what people are saying.
         The most successful physical stores are all about buyer convenience. Customers
 enjoy places with flexible hours that fit their schedules. Think of the success Walmart,
 24-hour drug stores and gas stations have with that model. We are also more likely to
 shop at places close to us.
         Offering support via messaging apps (like WhatsApp, Twitter and Facebook)
 helps businesses create that same sense of 24-hour availability. These are the same
 channels customers use to interact with friends and family, so it gives you a chance to
 meet them where they already are.
         You should also offer opportunities for customers to help themselves. Many
 customers prefer the hands-off convenience of a knowledge base, where they can search
 for information without having to interact with customer support reps.
         In our Trends Report, we asked customers what matters most to them when
 resolving an issue with a company. 73 percent said "they resolve my issue quickly" and
 59 percent said "they respond quickly." In a constantly connected world, customers
 don't want to have to wait a day or even more than a few hours, for a response. Here
 are some tips for delivering faster responses:
        Messaging channels enable agents to help more customers at once because they
         are asynchronous. In fact, support teams that have the fastest resolution times
         are 42 percent more likely to be messaging with their customers.
 AI-powered bots can intercept would-be tickets when agents are off the clock
        Bots can also gather details upfront, such as city or account type, before an agent
         takes over
         To improve overall customer satisfaction, you have to put time and effort into a
 business strategy that puts customers first.
         Using a tool like the balanced scorecard is a great first step. The balanced
 scorecard guides companies in thinking about their operations from four different
 perspectives:
 Financial
 Internal business
 Customer
         It also helps companies consider how all their activities are working toward the
 goal of high customer satisfaction.
         The balanced scorecard is just one way to incorporate customer satisfaction into
 company goals. You can (and should) incorporate customer satisfaction into your
 company mission and value proposition, too. That keeps it top-of-mind with every
 employee, regardless of their position.
         If there is one thing the pandemic taught us, it’s that empathy is an essential
 skill for support professionals— it is even more valuable than customer service
 experience. In fact, nearly half of customers want to interact with an empathetic
 customer service representative. Support leaders can provide empathy training, but it is
 also a good idea to hire support reps who can already put themselves in an angry
 customer’s shoes and communicate that understanding to the customer. Businesses
 might also consider allowing agents to make exceptions to certain policies in situations
 that require empathy.
         While agents interact with customers directly, the company has to provide them
 with tools to do their jobs well. Customer satisfaction requires a mix of both customer
 service skills and the right software. Here is a list of customer satisfaction tools and
 software:
        Customer service software that makes it easy for customers to reach you on the
         channels of their choice
        A ticketing system that makes it easy to manage customer requests and respond
         to customers quickly and effectively
        CSAT surveys: With customer service software these can be sent automatically
         after every customer service interaction
        Survey tools that integrate with your customer service software, such as
         SurveyMonkey
        Robust customer analytics tools that track customer engagement and support
         performance across channels
2. Outline a plan.
           When embarking on any sort of campaign, it's helpful to take a step back and
 ask, "Why are we doing this?"
           With that in mind, the specific solution isn't necessarily the important part here.
 The important part is stepping back and saying, "If we see that a segment of our
 customers is unsatisfied, what will we do about it?"
            Once your goals are defined, you need an actionable plan to achieve them.
 Before collecting customer data, your team should outline the actions you'll take after
 feedback is gathered and analyzed. Some examples you can execute are:
            You can also plan actions based on your segment of highly satisfied customers.
 Methodologies like NPS® segment your customers into promoters, passives, and
 detractors for a few reasons. First, NPS provides you with an aggregate satisfaction
 score, thus providing a health check and a longitudinal metric to track and improve over
 time.
            Once you've sat down and discussed your plans with key stakeholders, you need
 to design your survey. The first step you should take is determining the type of metrics
 you'll use to measure customer satisfaction.
            You can choose among a few different options for customer satisfaction
 surveys. There's no unanimous agreement on which one is best. A few popular methods
 are:
           Customer Effort Score (CES) is very similar, but instead of asking how satisfied
 the customer was, you ask them to gauge the ease of their experience.
           You're still measuring satisfaction, but this way you're gauging user effort —
 the assumption being that the easier a task is, the better the experience will be. As it
 turns out, making an experience a low-effort one is one of the greatest ways to reduce
 frustration and disloyalty.
           NPS asks the question, "How likely is it that you would recommend this
 company to a friend or colleague?"
         NPS is often used as a more general indicator of customer loyalty and brand
 devotion. Here's how Thomas explains it:
         These are all "one-question" methods that vastly simplify the process of
 collecting customer insights. While you may not think the survey methodology matters
 much, how you ask the question measures different variables.
         The above three styles are commonly used, but those aren't your only options
 for customer satisfaction surveys. Depending on your goals, you can also send longer
 email surveys that include things like demographic questions. You can customize it to
 your desires — just remember that shorter surveys tend to have better completion rates.
         Most importantly, don't ask questions if you won't do anything with the
 information. This not only wastes your time, but your customers' time as well. And,
 studies show that 66% of adults believe that the most important thing a company can
 do is value its time.
         Still, sometimes longer surveys can be useful, like in the example below.
 Sharing a more thorough survey can be advantageous if there’s an added incentive for
 doing so like a discount or a giveaway entry for a chance to win a prize. This way, you
 receive more data and the customer feels like they get something in return.
         You can use more than one methodology — since they all measure something
 different. In fact, Vipin Thomas explains how you can combine multiple scores for a
 greater picture of customer satisfaction:
         "We take CSAT and NPS very seriously, both independently and in
 conjunction, since a single measure alone won't show the true picture of why customers
 are detractors or promoters (NPS) or why you have a lesser than expected CSAT.
         For example, a customer that has had three continuous, negative CSAT scores
 and is also a detractor on NPS would be an immediate at-risk customer. A customer
 with positive CSAT and a promoter on NPS are potentially the best source of advocacy
 and candidates to cross-sell or upsell since they already have seen the value in their
 interactions with the process and product."
Here's how Luke Harris, Customer Success Director at Wayin, puts it:
         "Qualitative data is the nirvana many of us are searching for, because it provides
 us with the most human version of customer satisfaction with the added benefit of scale
 and replicability. To be able to unbiasedly, capture and track qualitative data helps -
 especially a scaling business - to quickly ascertain where it should focus, both in terms
 of product support and development."
This step is all about who you're sending the survey to and when you're sending it.
         If you go back to your goals outline, this shouldn't be too hard to determine, at
 least strategically. People tend to forget this step, but it's crucial as it affects the quality
 and utility of your data.
         Tactically, you can trigger a survey pretty much anywhere, at any time, and to
 anyone. But, doing it strategically, depends specifically on when and where it's
 triggered.
Good examples of event data that can be used to fire a survey are:
        Key actions taken in your app — for instance, Qualaroo asks right after you
         receive your 10th survey response
         Surveying too often will result in low response rates, so we recommend sending
 a customer satisfaction (NPS) survey seven days after signup, 30 days after the first
 survey, and every 90 days during the customer lifecycle.
With all the options for triggering let's start with some best practices:
        Who you survey changes what insights you get. If you survey website visitors
         about their satisfaction, the respondents are anonymous and may be a customer
         or they may not. This will bring you different data than sending an email to
         recent customers.
        You should survey your customers more than once to see how things change
         longitudinally. Especially if you operate a SaaS company or a subscription
         service, regular NPS surveys can help you analyze trends at the aggregate and
         individual levels.
         If a respondent gives you a high score, think about adding a follow-up question.
          For instance, Tinder asks you to rate its app in the app store if you give it a high
          score.
          In general, there are three primary methods by which you can send customer
 satisfaction surveys:
          Each of these may require a different software or tool. For instance, Usabilla or
 HotJar specialize in triggered in-app surveys. But if you're sending post-purchase
 surveys, you may need something that offers a web interface, like Typeform. Email
 surveys can usually be performed with any survey tool, like SurveyMonkey or Google
 Forms.
          Matt Hogan, Head of Customer Success at Intricately, also emphasizes the need
 to collect continuous and real-time feedback, regardless of major feature launches or
 company-based events:
          "I recommend surveying in-app and on a rolling basis. This will keep the
 constant feedback loop going. The technology available makes it easy to manage this."
          Once you've collected your data, make sure it doesn't just sit there dormant and
 unused. You've got all this customer insight, and it's just waiting to be uncovered!
          Most NPS tools give you the ability to easily segment respondents based on
 their category, and they usually integrate with products where you can take action based
 on each segment. For instance, HubSpot users can easily integrate with their survey tool
 of choice to trigger emails based on survey response score.
         Back to my first point: Now that you have these insights, what are you going to
 do with them?
         Ultimately, this is a personal decision that will reflect your own findings and
 capabilities. You may find that a whole segment is dissatisfied because of a particular
 experience. In that case, you may need to further investigate why that experience is
 causing dissatisfaction and make changes to improve it.
         Or, you may find that you have a small percentage of super fans. Now that you
 can identify these people, perhaps you can work with your marketing and customer
 success teams to plan advocacy programs that increase this group’s value.
         The possibilities are endless, but it all starts with accurately measuring customer
 satisfaction. But asking for scores is only a part of it — make sure you're creating
 conditions for customers to leave you high scores, too. Check out the HubSpot
 Customer Code and for more ideas on how you can do this.
         Now, that we’ve gone over how to measure customer satisfaction, let’s review
 tools you'll need to accurately assess this metric.
Introduction
         As the size of sample is limited to 50 and bound to Mysuru city it may give
 appropriate suggestions to some extent.
1. Gender
1 Male 34 68%
2 Female 16 32%
                                          Total                           50         100%
             (Source: Primary Data)
35
30
                                            25
                      NO.OF RESPONDENTS
                                            20
                                                        34
                                            15
10 16
                                             0
                                                   M AL E    F E M AL E
GENDER
         From the above table it is found that 34(68%) are Male respondents and
 16(32%) are Female respondents.
Finally, it is observed that maximum numbers of the respondents are Male only.
                                                           20%
                                       36%
                                                                          18-25
                                                                 20%      26-30
                                                                          31-40
                                                                          above 40
                                                24%
         From the above table it is found that 10(20%) respondents are under the age
 group of 18-25 years,10(20%) of the respondents are under the age group of 26-30
 years,12(24%) are under the age group of 31-40 years and rest 18(36%) of them are
 above 40 years.
         Finally, it is observed that maximum of the respondents are in the age group of
 above 40 years.
3.Educational Qualifications
1 Graduates 17 34%
3 Other 11 22%
4 SSLC 2 4%
5 PUC 2 4%
6 Illiterate 3 6%
                                      Total                          50                100%
         (Source: Primary Data)
                                                                                              Graduation
                                                                                              Post graduation
                                          17
                                                                                              Other
                                                      15
                                                                                              SSLC
           No.of Respondents
                                                               11
                                                                                              PUC
                                                                                              Illiterate
                                                                          2      2     3
Educational Qualifications
         From the above table it is found that 17(34%) of the respondents are
 graduates,15(30%) of the respondents are post graduates,11(22%) of the respondents
 are other category courses,2(4%) of the respondents are SSLC and PUC and 3(6%) of
 the respondents are illiterates.
4. Occupations
1 Agriculturist 3 6%
2 Business 11 22%
3 Profession 19 38%
4 Service 7 14%
5 Others 10 20%
                                        Total                             50               100%
     (Source: Primary Data)
                                                                19
          No of Respondents
                                                      11
                                                                                           10
         From the above table it is observed that 3(6%) respondents are from Agricultural
 background,11(22%) respondents are Business persons,19(38%) respondents are
 professionalist, 7(14%)respondents are from service sector and rest 10(20%) are from
 other sectors.
5.Monthly income
2 25000-50000 10 20%
3 50000-75000 10 20%
4 75000-100000 11 22%
                     Total                             50                      100%
     (Source: Primary Data)
                                                            Below 25000, 7
                 Above 100000, 12
25000-50000, 10
75000-100000, 11
50000-75000, 10
           From the above table it is found that 7(14%) of the respondents are having
 income below 25000,10(20%) are earning between 25000-50000 and 50000-
 75000,11(22%) are earning between 75000-100000 and 12(24%) are having above
 1lakh income per month.
Finally, it is observed that majority respondents are having income above 1 lakh.
6.Mode of awareness
1 Newspapers 1 2%
3 Internet 12 24%
4 Television 9 18%
                                      Total                             50                    100%
     (Source: Primary Data)
28
                                       30                           9
                                                              12
                  No.of respondents
                                       25
                                       20                                      Television
                                       15                                Internet
                                       10
                                                                   Friends & relatives
                                        5          1
                                                             Newspapers
                                        0
                                               1
                                                       Mode of awareness
           From the above table it is observed that one(2%) of the respondent got
 information through newspapers,9(18%) got information through Television,12(24%)
 got information through internet and 28(56%) got detailed information through friends
 and relatives.
7.Price of vehicle
1 Low 2 4%
2 High 5 10%
3 Reasonable 43 86%
                      Total                               50                100%
     (Source: Primary Data)
                                Graph - 4.7 : Price of vehicle
                          4%
                                      10%
                                                   86%
                                                                     Percentage
                                                                     No.of Respondents
                          2
                                       5
                                                     43
                       Low
                                     High
                                               Reasonable
                                  Response
           From the above table it is observed that 2(4%) of the respondents are opined
 that price is low,5(10%) are opined that price is high and maximum respondents
 i.e.,43(86%) are opined that price is reasonable.
3 Inconvinent 2 4%
                                          Total                              50                  100%
        (Source: Primary Data)
                                 40
                                          36
                                 20
                                                                    12
                                  0
             Moderate convinent                                                              2
                                                          Highly convinent
                                                                                          Inconvinent
                                                           Service Network
         From the above table it is observed that 36(72%) respondents opted moderate
 convinent,12(24%) opted for highly convinent and 2(4%) are opined that service
 network of Nissan is inconvinent.
9.Car technology
1 Satisfied 39 78%
3 Average 2 4%
Total 50 100%
                                    4%
                      AVERAGE
                                    2
    Response
                                    18%
               HIGHLY SATISFIED
                                             9
                                    78%
                      SATISFIED
                                                                                     39
No.of respondents
                 Finally, it clearly shows that maximum number of respondents are satisfied with
 car technology.
10.Comfort
2 Less Comfortable 1 2%
3 Uncomfortable 0 0%
4 Comfortable 42 84%
                                    Total                                50               100%
  (Source: Primary Data)
                                                                                   42
            No.of Respondents
                                      7
                                                      1              0
Response
         From the above table it is observed that 7(14%) of the respondents felt more
 comfortable, one(2%) of the respondent felt less comfortable, 42(84%) felt comfortable
 and none of the respondent felt uncomfortable to drive Nissan cars.
11.Car quality
1 Satisfied 40 80%
3 Average 4 8%
4 Dissatisfied 1 2%
5 Highly dissatisfied 0 0%
                     Total                                50                   100%
  (Source: Primary Data)
2% 0%
                                          8%
                                    10%
80%
12.Milage
1 Good 42 84%
3 Average 2 4%
                                       Total                                  50              100%
  (Source: Primary Data)
45 42
                                40
                                35
            No.of Respondents
                                30
                                25
                                20
                                15
                                10                                    6
                                5                                                      2
                                0
                                               Good               Very good         Average
                                                                  Response
          From the above table it is observed that 42(84%) of the respondents felt
 good,6(12%) felt very good and 2 (4%) of the respondents felt average about the
 mileage of Nissan car compared to other cars.
1 Satisfied 39 78%
3 Indifferent 2 4%
4 Dissatisfied 0 0%
5 Highly dissatisfied 0 0%
                                           Total                                    50                        100%
  (Source: Primary Data)
39
                                40
                                35
           No.of Respondents
                                30
                                25
                                20
                                                                 9
                                15
                                10                                         2
                                                                                     0         0
                                 5
                                 0
                                                                  Response
          Finally, Maximum respondents are satisfied with the availability of space in the
 car.
14. Desirability:
                                              No.of Respondents
      Response                                                                       Total Score Rank
                                       1           2      3        4           5
Price 6 16 19 6 3 50 166 2
Mileage 5 18 17 7 3 50 165 3
Comfort 31 8 4 1 6 50 207 1
        Total                         50          50     50       50           50
  (Source: Primary Data)                                          (Score= Likert Scale X Frequencies)
                                     Graph - 4.14: Desirability to buy Nissan cars
                                                                                                    1
                                                                          2
                                                                                        3
                 No.of Respondents
                                                              4
                                              5
                                                                                                 207        Rank
                                                                         166
                                                                                       165
                                                          107                                               Score
                                             105
1 Available 45 90%
2 Easily available 4 8%
3 Not available 1 2%
                 Total                            50                       100%
  (Source: Primary Data)
         From the above table it is found that 45(90%) respondents opined that spare
 parts is available,4(8%) respondents opined easily available and one(2%) of the
 respondent opted not available.
1 High 4 8%
2 Reasonable 46 92%
3 Low 0 0%
                        Total                               50                      100%
  (Source: Primary Data)
                            Low        0
           Response
Reasonable 46
High 4
                                   0         10        20         30         40       50
                                                     No.of Respondents
         From the above table it is found that 4(8%) respondents are agreed that price of
 spare parts is high, 46(92%) are agreed with reasonable and none of the respondent
 agreed to low.
Finally, maximum respondents are agreed that price of spare parts is reasonable.
1 Agree 42 84%
3 Disagree 1 2%
4 Strongly disagree 0 0%
                                     Total                                        50                         100%
  (Source: Primary Data)
                              45
                              40
                                       42
          NO.OF RESPONDENTS
                              35
                              30
                              25
                              20
                              15
                              10
                              5
                                                          7                1                  0
                              0
                                      Agree         Strongly agree     Disagree        Strongly disagree
                                                                RESPONSE
                   From the above table it is observed that 42(84%) respondents agreed that Nissan
 cars is fit to Indian roads,7(14%) respondents strongly agree and one(2%) respondent
 disagrees the above statement.
                   Finally, Maximum number of respondents agrees that Nissan car is fit to Indian
 roads.
18.Performance of car
1 Good 36 72%
2 Excellent 11 22%
3 Average 3 6%
4 Below average 0 0%
                     Total                                50                   100%
  (Source: Primary Data)
         From the above table it is found that 36(72%) respondents felt good,11(22%)
 respondents felt excellent and 3(6%) respondents felt average about the overall
 performance of car compared to other cars.
2 Yes 28 56%
3 Maybe 15 30%
4 No 0 0%
5 Never 0 0%
                       Total                                                 50               100%
  (Source: Primary Data)
                                                          28
                                                                                    Definetly yes
                                                               15                   Yes
                                                                                    Maybe
                               No.of Respondents
                                                                         0
                                                                     0              No
                                                                                    Never
                                                     7
Response
         From the above table it is observed that 7(14%) respondents responded that
 definitely they will suggest others to purchase Nissan cars,28(56%) respondents reacted
 to ‘yes’,15(30%) respondents reacted to ‘may be’ and none of the respondents denied
 to suggest.
1 Yes 40 80%
2 Somewhat 7 14%
3 No 3 6%
                       Total                              50                    100%
  (Source: Primary Data)
                                           3
                                7
40
Yes Somewhat No
2 Fast 2 4%
3 Normal 47 94%
4 Exceptional 0 0%
5 Late 1 2%
                                         Total                               50                   100%
 (Source: Primary Data)
                                                              47
                                  50
                                  45
                                  40
              No.of Respondents
         From the above table it is found that 47(94%) respondents opined that time
 taken by customer executive is ‘normal’,2(4%) respondents reaction is ‘fast’ and
 one(2%) of the respondent reaction is ‘late’.
1 Excellent 12 24%
2 Good 34 68%
3 Satisfactory 3 6%
4 Poor 1 2%
                                 Total                              50                    100%
 (Source: Primary Data)
                                40
                                                          34
                                35
                                30
            NO.OF RESPONDENTS
25
20
15 12
                                10
                                                                              3
                                5                                                         1
                                0
                                          Excellent      Good            Satisfactory    Poor
RESPONSE
         From the above table it is found that 12(24%) respondents are opined that fixing
 of their vehicle problem was ‘excellent’,34(68%) respondents are opined ‘good’,3(6%)
 respondents are opined ‘satisfactory’ and one(2%) of the respondent opined ‘poor’.
4.Delivery of car
1 Yes 47 94%
2 No 3 6%
                                 Total                              50            100%
 (Source: Primary Data)
50
                            45             47
                            40
                            35
        No.of Respondents
30
25
20
15
10
                            5
                                                                            3
                            0
                                           Yes                             No
                                                         Response
                 From the above table it is found that 47(94%) respondents are of opinion that
 Nissan motors deliver their car on time and 3(6%) respondents opined ‘no’.
1 High 0 0%
2 Low 7 14%
3 Reasonable 43 86%
                     Total                                     50             100%
 (Source: Primary Data)
0, 0%
7, 14%
43, 86%
         From the above table it is observed that7(14%) respondents responded that price
 for car service charged by Nissan motors was ‘low’ and 43(86%) respondents opined
 ‘reasonable’.
         Finally, maximum respondents agreed that price charged for car service was
 reasonable.
6. Quality of service
1 Satisfied 35 70%
3 Neutral 6 12%
4 Dissatisfied 0 0%
5 Very dissatisfied 0 0%
                                          Total                                  50                100%
       (Source: Primary Data)
                                                35
                                 35
                                 30
             No.of Respondents
                                                                                              Satisfied
                                 25
                                                                                              Very satisfied
                                 20                                                           Neutral
                                                                                              Dissatisfied
                                 15
                                                          9                                   Very dissatisfied
                                 10                                6
                                 5
                                                                             0        0
                                 0
                                                              Response
Findings
      It is observed that maximum respondents (36%) fall under the age group of
         above 40 years
      It is observed that maximum respondents (78%) are satisfied with the Nissan
         car technology. Thus,it is found that Nissan has good car technology.
      It is observed that maximum respondents (80%) are satisfied with the car quality
         which indicates Nissan provides good quality of vehicle.
      It is observed that maximum respondents (78%) are satisfied with the space
         availability of Nissan car which gives travellers a sense of peace and comfort to
         cover a long way.
      It is observed that maximum respondents (90%) are agreed that spare parts are
         available which makes easy when there is an repair in the car.
      It is observed that maximum respondents (92%) are agreed that price of spare
         parts is reasonable.
      It is observed that maximum respondents (84%) agreed that Nissan car fits to
         Indian roads. Thus, it is found that Nissan suits to poor road conditions as well.
      It is observed that maximum respondents (72%) felt good about the overall
         performance of Nissan cars.
      It is observed that maximum respondents (68%) agreed that price of car service
         charged by Nissan motors is reasonable.
      It is observed that maximum respondents (70%) are satisfied with the quality of
         car service provided by Nissan motors.
 Respondents are also satisfied with the car service provided by Nissan motors.
Suggestions :
 Nissan Magnite has noisy engine which has to be considered to avoid noise.
      Nissan Magnite has vibration in the back gear and vibrates on load which has
         to be examined to control the vibration.
      Nissan Magnite has bit hard steering wheel which has to be scrutinized as it may
         lead to accidents if steering doesn’t comes under control.
Conclusion:
         Nissan Magnite was introduced on December 2020. Nissan has only one current
 model ‘Magnite’ variant starts at Rs.6 lakh and top variant price goes upto 11 lakh.
 Maximum respondents opined it is best compact SUV for Indian family who use for
 there domestic purposes and it is value for money at its segment.
         Nissan Magnite has decent engine ,good performance on road and generous
 ground clearance. Nissan Magnite has petrol engine which has easy maintenance and it
 is best choice for family using SUV over short distances and it is value for money.
         It is best for middle class people who looks for comfort, mileage and low
 maintenance cost for lowest cost price.All over majority respondents are happy with
 the their choice of purchasing Nissan magnite.
         Nissan Magnite is a new born for Nissan as all other models are discontinued in
 India due to low sales.It is a good restart for Nissan as there is a positive feedback from
 customers
         Although the feedback from respondents are positive, the satisfaction metrics
 reveal that the customer needs are not entirely met. Hence, the Nissan should consider
 suggestions offered by respondents to retain its customers.
REFERENCE:
 Websites:
 https://consumer satisfaction - Search (bing.com)
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan
 https://www.zendesk.com/blog/customer-satisfaction-score
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Motor_India
Books:
                                      ANNEXURE
                                  QUESTIONNAIRE
 16. How you attracted to buy Nissan car among all other brands             (Please rank)
    a) Brand image
    b) Service network
    c) Price
    d) Mileage
    e) Comfort
 17. Availability of spare parts for major repairs of products
    a) Easily available
    b) Available
    c) Not available
 18. Price of spare parts is
    a) High
    b) Reasonable
    c) Low
 22. Please give suggestion for improve the quality and performance of Nissan car
         ………………………………………………………………………………
         ………………………………………………………………………………
                                         Section-B
 1.Is it easy to get an appointment?
    a) Yes
    b) Somewhat
    c) No
 2.Time taken by customer service representative to solve your issue?
    a) Very time consuming
    b) Late
    c) Normal
    d) Fast
    e) Exceptional
 3.Was all your vehicle problems fixed completely?
    a) Excellent
    b) Good
    c) Satisfactory
    d) Poor
e) Very unsatisfied