1. AN INVESTIGATION INTO CUSTOMER’S SATISFACTION
AND EXPECTATIONS TOWARDS UBAR’S GRAND RECONSTRUCTION
A report prepared for
MKTG202: Marketing Research
Tutor: Alex Belli
Prepared by:
Bao Phuong Nguyen – Student ID: 43469094
Weijin Yang – Student ID: 43819184
Umme Hani – Student ID: 42825865
Group 4 – Tutorial 7
Date of Submission: 14 November, 2014
Word count: 3012 words

2. TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................3
INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................4
BACKGROUND RESEARCH ...........................................................................................................4
DESKTOP RESEARCH......................................................................................................................4
EXPLORATORY RESEARCH............................................................................................................4
Exploratory question ......................................................................................................................4
Method............................................................................................................................................4
Exploratory Results ........................................................................................................................5
CONCLUSION AND CONTRIBUTION TO THE NEXT STAGE......................................................5
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH .........................................................................................................5
RESEARCH QUESTION....................................................................................................................5
Information needed.........................................................................................................................6
Key Constructs................................................................................................................................6
METHOD ...........................................................................................................................................7
Population of Interest .....................................................................................................................7
Sampling Frame..............................................................................................................................7
Instrumentation (Questionnaire) ....................................................................................................7
RESULTS............................................................................................................................................8
Hypothesis Testing for Customer Satisfaction................................................................................8
Hypothesis Testing for Customer Expectations............................................................................12
Hypothesis Testing for the Importance Level...............................................................................16
CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................20
SUMMARY.......................................................................................................................................20
REVIEW OF ASSUMPTIONS AND STUDY LIMITATIONS...........................................................20
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH...................................................................21
REFERENCES...................................................................................................................................21
APPENDIX.........................................................................................................................................21
UBAR’S OFFERINGS......................................................................................................................21
IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES ............................................................22
QUESTIONNAIRE IN THE QUALITATIVE RESEARCH...............................................................24

3. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report – An Investigation in Ubar’s Customer Expectations to Reconstruction – examines the
variation of customer satisfaction and expectations depending on their behavioural loyalty. This aims
to assist Ubar’s managers in their decision-making process with an overall guide for the upcoming
reconstruction. To deliver a full report to managers, researchers need to take a three-stage research
project.
The report firstly mentions about some noteworthy trends in the general industry, and then analyses
two researches conducted by the researchers. The former research is qualitative with open-ended
questions, which investigates customer overall attitudes towards Ubar’s offerings and the illustrated
reconstruction. The latter one is quantitative with a survey distributed to respondents to gain insights
the differences between the two groups of behavioural loyalty in their satisfaction and expectations.
All information about sampling methods, instrumentations and key findings will be provided
detailedly. In addition, details about Ubar’s offerings, in-depth interview questions and the
quantitative questionnaire can be found in the Appendix part.
At the end of this report, some managerial implications will be outlined based on the statistical
analysis, along with the current limitations and recommendations for further researches. Managers
will be informed with the priority of changes needed to be taken, based on their prioritized segment,
either loyal or non-loyal one.

4. INTRODUCTION
In recent years, the bar industry has experienced the worst economic performance as a consequence
of increasing health awareness and legislation. Euromonitor (2013, p.6) reported that the percentage
of unit growth from 2007 to 2012 for bar and pub services had declined by 10.5%. The Macquarie
Ubar, which is the sole bar in the university campus, also experiences the downturn in sales led by
the general situation. Recently, the Ubar boards have already adjusted their marketing techniques and
policies as an attempt to attract customers, especially Macquarie university students. However,
feedbacks for the degraded interior design, insufficient facilities and limited innovativeness in the
current offerings are still presented. Meanwhile, nearby entertainment centres, such as The Ranch,
STRIKE and TGIFriday, have developed quickly and been increasingly attractive to customers with
a variety of services and eye-catching decoration. To survive in such a challenging business
environment, a grand reconstruction is indispensable.
A reconstruction resulting in more offerings and better design obviously helps to not only retain and
create the loyalty of current customers but also attract new customers. Yet the changes in which
services that need to be focused on still remains unknown. Hence it is required to investigate
students’ satisfaction and expectations, along with Ubar’s disadvantages compared to nearby
competitors, to have a guide for its rebuilding. The researchers’ tasks are to examine customer
expectations under the influences of their behavioural loyalty, analyse the differences and then give
suggestions for possible changes.
BACKGROUND RESEARCH
DESKTOP RESEARCH
The report of Euromonitor (2013, p.2) mentioned above also illustrated the latest trend in the bar and
pub services that is the growing presentation of foodservice. 1% growth in this term has been
recorded despite the decreasing trend in the entire bar and pub industry, as bar and pub operators
have moved their priority from outstanding alcoholic drinks to inexpensive food availability.
Whether food availability is expected by Ubar’s customers in the reconstruction will be examined in
this research with the purpose of assisting managers to make decisions.
EXPLORATORY RESEARCH
Exploratory question
Before conducting the quantitative research, researchers need to gain insights what mainly attract
students’ concern and raise their expectations among all Ubar’s offerings. The exploratory research
aims to investigate students’ overall attitudes and expectations towards changes in Ubar if the
reconstruction occurs.
Method
The population of interest was all Macquarie students presenting at Ubar in the trading hours from 12
– 10pm. Researchers chose the convenience sampling method for this exploratory research, so five
respondents were approached at Ubar and asked them five questions as shown in the Appendix. In
addition, the in-depth interview method was chosen based on its effectiveness in the collection of

5. customers’ thoughts and allowance for customers to express fully their feelings, as a commencement
of the research.
Exploratory Results
The qualitative research indicated that most customers showed their satisfaction towards Ubar’s
high-quality drinks, the terrace and the socialization opportunity, while space insufficiency and food
unavailability appeared to be problems. Respondents also identified problems in the relatively short
open hours and the absence of smoking area nearby. For competitors, STRIKE and The Ranch Hotel
were suggested to be most inviting alternatives, with wider spaces and more varieties.
When asked about their expectations, customers expressed their preferences to see more social
events at the bar, seating areas, food availability, drink variations and entertainment facilities after its
reconstruction. Furthermore, the qualitative research illustrated the variation of customer
expectations depending on the level of their behavioural loyalty. Ubar’s loyal customers appeared to
expect more in a comprehensive service with higher-standard requirements.
CONCLUSION AND CONTRIBUTION TO THE NEXT STAGE
The desktop research suggests the current leading trend of providing foodservice at bars and pubs in
the industry, while the exploratory research shows that customers expected the major changes both in
Ubar’s design and services offered. A further study is to be taken to analyse the distinction between
two segments of customer behavioral loyalty in their satisfaction and expectations, which allows
researchers to provide some specific recommendations for each facility based on the development
strategy.
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH
RESEARCH QUESTION
According to the previous qualitative research, customers expected Ubar to improve their exterior
and interior design, as well as their offerings. The expectations about Ubar’s offerings, including
food, drink, entertainment facilities and events, better suit this proposal. The qualitative research also
showed that customer expectations could vary based on the level of their behavioral loyalty.
As a result, the investigation into customer satisfaction and expectations about Ubar’s offerings,
affected by their behavioral loyalty needs to be conducted. Previous research showed that customers
who frequently go to Ubar expressed a different satisfaction and expectation level compared to
customers who do not. This leads to the below hypotheses:
H1: There is a difference between high-loyal and low-loyal customers’ static performance
satisfaction.
H2: There is a difference between high-loyal and low-loyal customers’ interpersonal
satisfaction.

6. H3: There is a difference between high-loyal and low-loyal customers’ static performance
expectations.
H4: There is a difference between high-loyal and low-loyal customers’ interpersonal
expectations.
The exploratory research also indicated that loyal customers and non-loyal customers considered the
importance level of each expectation construct differently. This results in our third hypothesis:
H5: There is a difference between loyal and non-loyal customers in their considerations of the
importance level among Ubar’s offerings and staff’s skills.
Information needed
Customer behavioural loyalty and satisfaction were firstly examined for current performance. Two
types of customer expectations which are static performance and interpersonal expectations were
then investigated to help visualize desired changes. In addition, the different importance levels of
different types of offerings, including bar food, drink, events and entertainment facilities, along with
staff’s performance were also necessary for the analysis.
Key Constructs
CONSTRUCT THEORETICAL DEFINITION OPERATIONAL DEFINITION
Behavioral
Loyalty
The likeliness of customer
repurchase and the frequency of
purchase (Worthington, Russel-
Bennett & Hartel, 2009)
Investigating how often customers go to Ubar
to identify their behavioral loyalty with an
Interval Scale
Customer
Satisfaction
The discrepancy between
customers’ expectations and their
judgement about the performance
of a product or service (Kotler et
al, 2010)
The two dimensions being
considered in customer satisfaction
are Static Performance Satisfaction
dealing with offerings, and
Interpersonal Satisfaction dealing
with staff.
Customers are asked about their evaluation of
the performance of Ubar’s services and staff
with an Interval Scale, from Very Poor to
Very Good. Questions will be made based on
the below dimensions:
1. Services:
a. Food
b. Drink
c. Entertainment Facilities
d. Social Events
2. Staff:
a. Attitudes
b. Communication Skills
c. Problem Solving Skills
d. Information acknowledged
Static
Performance
The way to define services’ quality
and performance, including
The dimensions are as above for services but
measured with two scales:

7. Expectation accessibility, dependability,
timeliness, options, user-friendly
interfaces, technology application,
accuracy, physical evidences, and
ease to use. (Miller, 2000)
1. An Interval Scale from Very Good to
Very Poor to investigate the overall
expectations.
2. An Interval Scale, from Most Important to
Most Unimportant, in order to analyse the
importance of each sub-dimension to
customers.
Interpersonal
Expectation
The interaction between customers
and human elements of a business
(Miller, 2000)
Particularly in this research, we
examine the expectation to staff’s
attitudes, information
acknowledged, communication
and problem solving skills.
Questions will be generated with the
dimensions related to staff as mentioned in
the Customer Satisfaction construct. Each
dimension is measured with the same two
scales as above, to analyse customer
expectations for a good interactive Ubar.
METHOD
Population of Interest
All Macquarie students who are Ubar’s customers, presenting at Ubar in the trading hours from
12pm to 10pm
Sampling Frame
The researchers’ target is to achieve 80 respondents, which is a large-enough sample size to represent
the entire population. The proposed sampling frame is a convenience sample of students that
researchers approach at Ubar. Students will be asked for participation in the research and permission
to interpret and use their answers. If he/she agrees, a laptop or tablet computer will be given to
him/her to complete the online questionnaire.
The convenience sampling has a noticeable advantage of outstanding accessibility to respondents of
interest. It also saves time and cost, and is an easy way to collect information at researchers’
convenience. However, it has a problem with representativeness if used for a large population, as
randomness is not applied.
In addition to the convenience sample collected in person, the online questionnaire is also distributed
on social networks and the iLearn website to accomplish the target. It is a convenient method, as a
wider range of respondents can be approached. Yet the exact response rate and the respondents’
understanding level of the survey questions are ambiguous.
Instrumentation (Questionnaire)
A questionnaire will be prepared investigating all key constructs mentioned above, along
with some basic demographic questions.

8. RESULTS
The entire structural model was run with Independent sample t-tests, comprising some relevant
statistic information and hypothesis testing. The results for customer satisfaction are presented in the
first four tables, and the following four are about customer expectations. The statistic results of
importance level are shown in the last two tables in this report. Normal distributions for each sub-test
are assumed, regarding the large sample size, and thus make the tests valid.
Hypothesis Testing for Customer Satisfaction
The statistical analysis begins with the independent two-sample t-test for customer static
performance satisfaction. The test for the difference in the above construct between loyal and non-
loyal segments shows significant results for all attributed sectors. The first significant values of four
dimensions , food , drink , entertainment facilities and social events are all greater than 0.05, which
indicate that equal variance are assumed for the two groups. Accordingly, the results in the first rows
would be considered.
The test gives absolute t-statistics value for food, drink, entertainment facilities and social events of
t1=3.948, t2=2.779, t3= 4.429, and t4=3.911 respectively. Those t-statistics values lead to all
significant two tailed values which are smaller than 0.05. The smallest values are 0.000 belonging to
the dimensions of food, entertainment facilities and social events, while the greatest is 0.007 of
drink. This is contingent to H1, so there seems to be significant difference between high loyal and
low loyal customers in terms of static performance satisfaction at 95% confidence level. Based on
information from the group statistics table it can be concluded that, high loyal customers seem to
satisfy with Ubar’s offerings more than the low-loyal customers do.
Table 1: Group Statistics of Customer Static Performance Satisfaction
High loyalty
segment
N Mean Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
Food
No 65 3.31 .727 .090
Yes 15 4.13 .743 .192
Drink No 64 3.56 .687 .086
Yes 15 4.13 .834 .215
Entertainment Facilities No 64 3.38 .701 .088
Yes 15 4.27 .704 .182
Social Events
No 64 3.44 .814 .102
Yes 15 4.33 .724 .187
Table 2: Independent Samples Test of Customer Static Performance Satisfaction

9. Levene's
Test for
Equality of
Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig.
(2-
tailed
)
Mean
Differe
nce
Std.
Error
Differe
nce
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Food
Equal
variances
assumed
.003 .956 -3.948 78 .000 -.826 .209 -1.242 -.409
Equal
variances not
assumed
-3.894 20.649 .001 -.826 .212 -1.267 -.384
Drink
Equal
variances
assumed
.001 .971 -2.779 77 .007 -.571 .205 -.980 -.162
Equal
variances not
assumed
-2.463 18.707 .024 -.571 .232 -1.056 -.085
Entertainme
nt Facilities
Equal
variances
assumed
.001 .976 -4.429 77 .000 -.892 .201 -1.293 -.491
Equal
variances not
assumed
-4.420 21.026 .000 -.892 .202 -1.311 -.472
Social
Events
Equal
variances
assumed
.175 .677 -3.911 77 .000 -.896 .229 -1.352 -.440
Equal
variances not
assumed
-4.210 23.082 .000 -.896 .213 -1.336 -.456
Question: What do you think about the quality of services offered by Ubar?

10. Similarly, the test for the difference of customer interpersonal satisfaction between loyal and non-
loyal segments for all attributed sectors shows significant results. There are four involving aspects of
staff, being the attitude, communication skills, problem solving kills and information acknowledged.
As for the first significant values of four dimensions, they are all greater than 0.05. This indicates the
equal variances are assumed for the two groups, and the first row of results is to be considered.
It can be seen that the absolute t-statistics for attitude, communication skills, problem solving skills
and information acknowledge are t1=2.564, t2=3.141, t3=2.674 and t4=2.921 respectively. Those t-
statistics bring all significant two-tailed values to be less than 0.05. The greatest p-value is 0.012
belonging to the attitudes of staff, and the second greatest p-value is 0.009 belonging to problem
solving skills. The smaller value of information acknowledged is 0.005, and the smallest value of
communication skills is 0.002. This is contingent to H2; therefore, there is a significant difference
between high loyalty and low loyalty on interpersonal satisfaction of staff at 95% confidence level.
The group statistics table illustrates that a higher level of satisfaction of staff is more likely to be
expressed by high-loyal customers.
Table 3: Group Statistics of Customer Interpersonal Satisfaction
High loyalty
segment
N Mean Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
Attitudes
No 63 3.76 .911 .115
Yes 15 4.40 .632 .163
Communication Skills No 62 3.79 .771 .098
Yes 15 4.47 .640 .165
Problem Solving Skills No 61 3.51 .906 .116
Yes 15 4.20 .862 .223
Information
acknowledged
No 61 3.62 .778 .100
Yes 15 4.27 .704 .182

11. Table 4: Independent Samples Test for Customer Interpersonal Satisfaction
Levene's
Test for
Equality of
Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig.
(2-
tailed
)
Mean
Differe
nce
Std.
Error
Differe
nce
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Attitudes
Equal
variances
assumed
.593 .444 -2.564 76 .012 -.638 .249 -1.134 -.142
Equal
variances
not assumed
-3.197 29.608 .003 -.638 .200 -1.046 -.230
Communicat
ion Skills
Equal
variances
assumed
.008 .927 -3.141 75 .002 -.676 .215 -1.105 -.247
Equal
variances not
assumed
-3.521 24.860 .002 -.676 .192 -1.072 -.281
Problem
Solving
Skills
Equal
variances
assumed
.015 .903 -2.674 74 .009 -.692 .259 -1.207 -.176
Equal
variances not
assumed
-2.757 22.257 .011 -.692 .251 -1.212 -.172
Information
acknowledge
d
Equal
variances
assumed
.208 .649 -2.921 74 .005 -.644 .220 -1.083 -.205
Equal
variances not
assumed
-3.106 23.194 .005 -.644 .207 -1.072 -.215
Question: How do you evaluate the Ubar staff?

12. Hypothesis Testing for Customer Expectations
After testing the differences in customer satisfactions between two groups, customer expectations are
then examined. The test for the difference of customer static performance expectations between loyal
and non-loyal segments for all attributed sectors shows significant results. The first significant values
of the three dimensions being food, drink and social events are greater than 0.05, which indicate that
equal variances are assumed for the two groups. Thus, the results in the first rows of each dimension
would be considered. Meanwhile, the entertainment facilities dimension gives a significant value of
0.048, which is smaller than 0.05, so the two considered groups have different standard deviations,
and the results in the second row would be used.
The test gives absolute t-statistic values for food, drink, entertainment facilities and social events of
t1 = 3.497, t2 = 2.048, t3 = 4.566 and t4 = 2.423 respectively. Those t-statistic values lead to all
significant two-tailed values of smaller than 0.05. Particularly, the smallest value is 0.000 of the
entertainment facilities dimension, while the greatest value is 0.044 of the drink dimension. This is
contingent to H3, so there seems to be a significant difference between the two considered groups in
terms of their static performance expectations. The most significant difference comes from the
entertainment facilities dimension. Based on the group statistics table, the high-loyal customers
appear to have higher static performance expectations than the low-loyal ones do.
Table 5: Group Statistics of Customer Static Performance Expectations
High loyalty
segment
N Mean Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
Food
No 63 3.89 .825 .104
Yes 15 4.67 .488 .126
Drink No 62 4.06 .827 .105
Yes 15 4.53 .640 .165
Entertainment Facilities No 62 3.89 .907 .115
Yes 15 4.67 .488 .126
Social Events No 62 4.02 .878 .111
Yes 15 4.60 .632 .163

13. Table 6: Independent Samples Test of Static Performance Expectations
Levene's Test
for Equality
of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. T df Sig.
(2-
taile
d)
Mean
Differe
nce
Std.
Error
Differe
nce
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Food
Equal
variances
assumed
1.179 .281 -3.497 76 .001 -.778 .222 -1.221 -.335
Equal
variances not
assumed
-4.761 35.811 .000 -.778 .163 -1.109 -.446
Drink
Equal
variances
assumed
.007 .932 -2.048 75 .044 -.469 .229 -.925 -.013
Equal
variances not
assumed
-2.394 26.609 .024 -.469 .196 -.871 -.067
Entertainme
nt Facilities
Equal
variances
assumed
4.027 .048 -3.206 75 .002 -.780 .243 -1.264 -.295
Equal
variances not
assumed
-4.566 40.681 .000 -.780 .171 -1.124 -.435
Social
Events
Equal
variances
assumed
.773 .382 -2.423 75 .018 -.584 .241 -1.064 -.104
Equal
variances not
assumed
-2.953 28.655 .006 -.584 .198 -.988 -.179
Question: How would you like Ubar’s offerings to be?

14. By contrast, the test for the difference of customer interpersonal expectations between loyal and
non-loyal segments for all attributed sectors shows insignificant results, although in the group
statistics table, the means of the two groups are different. The first significant values are all
greater than 0.05, with the smallest value of 0.285. Therefore, the two samples appear to have
equal standard deviations in all interpersonal expectations dimensions. As a result, all statistic
results in the first rows would be considered.
The test gives absolute t-statistic values for attitudes, communication skills, problem solving
skills and information acknowledged of t1 = 1.674, t2 = 1.937, t3 = 1.185 and t4 = 1.817
respectively. Those t-statistic values lead to all significant two-tailed values of greater than
0.05. Particularly, the smallest value is 0.057 of the communication skills aspect, while the
greatest value is 0.240 of the problem solving skills aspect. This is not contingent to H4, so
there seems to be a similarity between the two considered groups in terms of their interpersonal
expectations.
Table 7: Group Statistics of customer interpersonal expectations
High loyalty
segment
N Mean Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
Attitudes
No 62 4.05 .931 .118
Yes 15 4.47 .516 .133
Communication Skills
No 61 4.00 .894 .115
Yes 15 4.47 .516 .133
Problem Solving Skills
No 61 3.97 .912 .117
Yes 15 4.27 .704 .182
Information
acknowledged
No 61 4.02 .904 .116
Yes 15 4.47 .640 .165

15. Table 8: Independent Samples Test of customer interpersonal expectations
Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. T df Sig.
(2-
tailed)
Mean
Differe
nce
Std.
Error
Diffe
rence
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Attitudes
Equal
variances
assumed
1.161 .285 -1.674 75 .098 -.418 .250 -.916 .080
Equal
variances not
assumed
-2.347 39.115 .024 -.418 .178 -.779 -.058
Communicat
ion Skills
Equal
variances
assumed
.284 .596 -1.937 74 .057 -.467 .241 -.947 .013
Equal
variances not
assumed
-2.655 37.511 .012 -.467 .176 -.823 -.111
Problem
Solving
Skills
Equal
variances
assumed
.089 .766 -1.185 74 .240 -.299 .253 -.803 .204
Equal
variances not
assumed
-1.386 26.890 .177 -.299 .216 -.743 .144
Information
acknowledge
d
Equal
variances
assumed
.211 .648 -1.817 74 .073 -.450 .248 -.944 .044
Equal
variances not
assumed
-2.232 29.439 .033 -.450 .202 -.863 -.038
Question: How would you like Ubar’s staff to be?

16. Hypothesis Testing for the Importance Level
The research finally aims to investigate the importance level of offerings and staff’s skills
considered by loyal and non-loyal customers. The test for the difference of customer considerations
for the above concern shows both significant and insignificant results, depending on which
dimensions are considered. The first significant values of most dimensions, except the
“communication skills” and “information acknowledged” dimensions, are greater than 0.05; thus,
the two samples appear to have equal standard deviations. As a result, all statistic results in the first
rows would be considered. Meanwhile, the first significant values of the two exceptions are smaller
than 0.05, particularly 0.21 and 0.31 respectively, so equal variances are not assumed and the
statistic results in the second rows would be used.
The test gives a wide range of absolute t-statistic values varying from 0.337 to 2.757. The “food”
dimension and most interpersonal dimensions, except the “attitude” one, have insignificant
significant two-tailed values, which are greater than 0.05. Therefore, there seems to be no
difference between loyal and non-loyal customers’ perspectives in such areas. On the contrary, all
other static performance dimensions and the “attitude” dimension mentioned above present
significant two-tailed values being smaller than 0.05. Thus, there appears to be a marked difference
between the two groups; particularly most considered dimensions are more important in the loyal
customers’ considerations. Due to the above analysis, the fifth hypothesis is not correct, as there are
still similarities between loyal and non-loyal segments in some tested dimensions.

17. Table 9: Group Statistics for the Importance level of Offerings and Staff Skills
High loyalty
segment
N Mean Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
The number of food
offered
No 63 3.51 .896 .113
Yes 15 3.80 .862 .223
The quality of drink No 62 3.82 .859 .109
Yes 15 4.33 .900 .232
The wide range of
entertainment facilities
No 62 3.73 .890 .113
Yes 14 4.36 .745 .199
The variety of social
events
No 62 3.87 .859 .109
Yes 15 4.47 .743 .192
Attitudes
No 57 1.6842 .92886 .12303
Yes 15 2.2667 .70373 .18170
Communication Skills No 57 2.3509 .91595 .12132
Yes 15 2.4667 1.24595 .32170
Problem Solving Skills No 57 3.5614 1.14981 .15230
Yes 15 4.1333 1.12546 .29059
Information
acknowledged
No 57 4.1228 .84664 .11214
Yes 15 3.9333 1.38701 .35813

18. Table 10: Independent Samples Test of the Importance Level of Static Performance and
Interpersonal Aspects
Levene's
Test for
Equality of
Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t Df Sig.
(2-
tailed)
Mean
Differe
nce
Std.
Error
Differe
nce
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Attitudes
Equal
variances
assumed
1.666 .201 -
2.259
70 .027 -
.58246
.25781 -
1.0966
4
-
.06827
Equal
variances not
assumed
-
2.654
28.293 .013 -
.58246
.21944 -
1.0317
4
-
.13317
Communicat
ion Skills
Equal
variances
assumed
5.556
.021 -.403 70 .688 -
.11579
.28752 -
.68922
.45764
Equal
variances not
assumed
-.337 18.173 .740 -
.11579
.34382 -
.83763
.60605
Problem
Solving
Skills
Equal
variances
assumed
.398 .530 -
1.721
70 .090 -
.57193
.33226 -
1.2346
1
.09075
Equal
variances not
assumed
-
1.743
22.326 .095 -
.57193
.32808 -
1.2517
6
.10790
Information
acknowledge
d
Equal
variances
assumed
4.861 .031 .667 70 .507 .18947 .28406 -
.37707
.75601
Equal
variances not
assumed
.505 16.840 .620 .18947 .37527 -
.60286
.98180
Question: What is important to Ubar in terms of their offerings?

19. Levene's
Test for
Equality of
Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t Df Sig.
(2-
tailed)
Mean
Differe
nce
Std.
Error
Differe
nce
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
The number
of food
offered
Equal
variances
assumed
.137 .712 -1.143 76 .257 -.292 .256 -.801 .217
Equal
variances not
assumed
-1.171 21.801 .254 -.292 .250 -.810 .226
The quality
of drink
Equal
variances
assumed
.230
.633 -2.047 75 .044 -.511 .249 -1.008 -.014
Equal
variances not
assumed
-1.990 20.631 .060 -.511 .257 -1.045 .024
The wide
range of
entertainme
nt facilities
Equal
variances
assumed
.141 .708 -2.462 74 .016 -.631 .256 -1.142 -.120
Equal
variances not
assumed
-2.757 22.242 .011 -.631 .229 -1.106 -.157
The variety
of social
events
Equal
variances
assumed
.042 .837 -2.470 75 .016 -.596 .241 -1.076 -.115
Equal
variances not
assumed
-2.699 23.927 .013 -.596 .221 -1.051 -.140
Question: What do you consider to be important for a Ubar’s staff?

20. CONCLUSIONS
SUMMARY
The present research informs managers the differences in satisfaction and expectation between loyal
and non-loyal customers so that they can make suitable decisions based on their priority. Overall,
there is a significant difference between the two segments in terms of static performance and
interpersonal satisfaction, as well as static performance expectations. Loyal customers have a higher
satisfaction, especially in entertainment facilities and staff’s communication, skills than non-loyal
customers do. They also show their higher static performance expectation, most remarkably in the
development of entertainment facilities after reconstruction. Managers are required to consider the
distinct between loyal and non-loyal customers to adopt a suitable renovation strategy. However,
interpersonal expectations seem to be similar, in all considered dimensions. Slightly higher
interpersonal expectation of loyal customers has been illustrated in the research, but not significantly
different. The implication of this is that the same marketing strategy for interpersonal relations can
be proposed to attract both groups.
In addition, this research provides information about the varied importance level of Ubar’s services
according to customers’ opinions. Loyal and non-loyal customers tend to consider each interpersonal
dimension as important as one another, except staff’s attitudes. However, the same strategy can be
tailored for both segments, although some additional researches are required to be conducted to test
whether the difference in the expectation to staff’s attitudes is significant enough to raise concern.
Besides, the two segments expressed their feelings towards the importance of each offerings
dimension differently, except food. Food availability seems to gain a great attention equally from
both high-loyal and low-loyal customers. That is expectable because food had been strongly
recommended by all respondents in the initial research and also mentioned as a new general trend in
the Euromonitor’s report in 2013. The strength of the demand for food at Ubar compared to other
offerings was yet not reflected clearly in this research, so for deciding whether to put foodservice at
the top priority, a further research needs to be taken.
REVIEW OF ASSUMPTIONS AND STUDY LIMITATIONS
Throughout the research, there are still some limitations presented in sampling and instrumentation,
along with some assumptions that were made.
Firstly, when taking samples, randomness was unapproachable, and the convenience sampling
method was adopted for both qualitative and quantitative researches. The choice for samples was
limited to people who were presenting at Ubar when the research was conducted. Probability
sampling methods would have provided more significant results and be more representative of the
entire population. However, due to cost and inability to access a Ubar customers list, it was not
possible for researchers to ensure randomness.
Secondly, in the quantitative research, limitations in the instrumentation part, particularly about
constructs measured were found. Specifically, in terms of customer expectations there are more
aspects to be researched. For example, fuzzy expectations which help managers to gain more insights
in customer unconsciousness when expecting a service performance cannot be investigated using

21. questionnaire. Ubar's interior design, space issues and unavailability of smoking area are also
excluded due to the priority of testing expectations towards only offerings and staff. To examine all
of the above aspects, more time, budget and facilities are required.
Lastly, assumptions were made regarding the validity of the data collection and hypothesis testing.
The survey was distributed both in person and via the Internet, and thus the respondents’ thorough
understanding about the questions was just assumed. In addition, in the hypothesis test, there was an
assumption for the normally distributed populations from the large-enough sample size, which needs
to be checked more carefully in further researches.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
As mentioned above, the improvement in food presentation seems to be an appealing suggestion for
reconstruction, but to make right decisions requires a further research. A following research can
mention about the comparison between food and other offerings in terms of customer expectations
and demand. It is also interesting to investigate non-loyal customer expectations to Ubar’s services in
depth, instead of making a comparison with the loyal segment, if Ubar managers desire to focus
more on this group to build up loyalty. Furthermore, a further research should overcome all of the
above limitations, which includes more constructs, collects larger sample size using a probability
sampling method and checks for the research validity more structurally. For such research,
researchers should be provided with a longer period of research time and better related facilities.
REFERENCES
Euromonitor International 2013, Cafes/Bars in Australia, pp. 1-11, Passport.
Kotler, P, Burton, S, Deans, K, Brown, L & Armstrong, G 2013, Marketing, 9th edn. Frenchs Forest,
NSW: Pearson Australia.
Miller, H 2000, ‘Managing Customer Expectations’, Journal of Information System Management,
vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 88-91.
Worthington, S, Russell-Bennett, R, Hartel, C 2009, ‘A Tri-dimensional Approach for Auditing
Brand Loyalty’, Journal of Brand Management, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 243-253.
APPENDIX
UBAR’S OFFERINGS
Drinks
Beer, wines and cocktails
No bar food available
Entertainment Facilities:
Arcade games
Pool tables

22. Events:
Toga Party
Rubik’s Cube Party
Trivia Night
Terrace Party
Pool Competition
Dance Lessons
Occasional Events (the Hangover Party, Halloween Eve, Christmas Party, etc.)
IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES
Respon
dents
How
often do
you go to
Ubar?
What do
you
usually
do at
Ubar?
Question 1:
What kind of
Ubar’s
offerings do
you like or
dislike? Why?
Question 2:
What do you
think about a
reconstruction
of Ubar? How
long would
you expect it
to last?
Question 3:
Instead of Ubar,
where would
you like to go
for
entertainment?
What are bonus
or minus points
of those places
compared to
Ubar?
Question 4: If
Ubar is
reconstructed,
what would
you
recommend
Ubar to
change or
add?
1
Once a
fortnight
Chill out
with
friends
and enjoy
beer
(+) Beer - high
quality
(+) Arcade
games, good
for relaxing
(-) No smoking
area
(-) Not enough
chairs and
tables
- Good for
changes
- Better not too
long as I nearly
graduate
STRIKE
(Macquarie
centre)
(+) Wider place
(+) Bowling and
laser tag
(-) Worse drinks
- Smoking area
- More chairs
and tables
2
Once a
month
Drink
beer, meet
new
friends
and play
chess
Relax
after tests
or exams
(+) Beer –
wonderful and
cheap
(+) Outside
area – love
fresh air
(-) Few tables
and chairs
(-) No food –
- Wonderful, I
will come back
to experience
new stuffs.
- 3 months,
better during
holidays
- The Ranch
Hotel
(+) Better food
and music
(+) More spaces
(-) I don’t like
drinks there
- STRIKE
(+) More choices
for entertainment
(-) No outside
- More tables
- Bowling

23. annoying
especially after
the Macquarie
food court
closes
area
3
Once a
week
Attend
Theme
nights,
play
billiards
(+) Bar – good
music and
drinks
(+) Outside
area – for fresh
air
(+) Pool tables
– good quality,
in a private
room
(-) Small, not
enough spaces
- Terrible,
hope it won’t
happen in the
next two years
- I don’t like
waiting for a
long time.
- The Ranch
Hotel
(+) Friday night
parties – music,
hanging out with
friends, $5
drinks
(+) A great
garden bar
- Bars in the city
(+) More social
(-) Not as
secured
(-) Far, with
transport costs
- Bigger
outside area
4
Once a
fortnight
Attend
events
organized
by student
groups,
organize
events of
The
Macquarie
Buddy
Program
(+) Pool tables
(+) The
“Charge your
phone” is very
helpful
(-) Outdoor
area –
especially
when it rains
- Good, I’m
waiting for a
major change
for the outdoor
area.
- Bad point is
that I have to
find places
for my events
- Not too long,
better during
holidays
- The Ranch
Hotel
(+) Bigger
spaces
(+) Great garden
(-) Expensive to
book a place for
student events
- STRIKE
(+) More
entertainment-
related facilities
- Major
changes for the
outdoor area
(glass ceilings
in case it rains,
umbrellas)
- Upgrades in
decorations
- More private
booths
- More
entertainment-
related
facilities
(Bowling,
karaoke)

24. 5
Twice or
three
times a
week
Go to
Trivia
nights and
during
happy
hours
(+) Bar – good
drinks
(+) Outside
area – fresh air
(-) No food
(-) No private
areas
- Good, better
reconstructed
for more
facilities
- Less than 5
months
The Ranch Hotel
(+) Bar food is
available
(+) Great events
on Thursdays
and Fridays
- Bar food
should be
served
- Cheap drinks
- A jukebox
machine to
pick up music
during normal
days
- Private areas
QUESTIONNAIRE IN THE QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
1. Are you a Macquarie University Student?
Yes
No
2. Are you male or female?
Male
Female
3. How old are you?
18 - 20
21 - 23
24 - 26
> 26
4. How often do you go to Ubar?

25. Never
Rarely
Sometimes
Quite Often
Very Often
The questions below allow you to express your satisfaction to Ubar based on your experiences.
Please check the box that describes exactly your evaluation towards Ubar's offerings including food,
drink, entertainment facilities and events, as well as the staff in the present.
5. What do you think about the quality of services offered in Ubar?
Very Bad Bad
Neither Good
nor Bad Good Very Good
Food
Drink
Entertainment Facilities
Social Events
6. How is the dependability of services offered in Ubar up to now?
Very Bad Bad
Neither Good nor
Bad Good Very Good
Safety
Reliability
Availability

26. 7. What do you think about Ubar offerings in terms of other characteristics?
Very Bad Bad
Neither Good
nor Bad Good Very Good
Number of options to
choose
Waiting time to be served
8. How do you evaluate the Ubar staff?
Very Bad Bad
Neither Good
nor Bad Good Very Good
Attitudes
Communication Skills
Problem Solving Skills
Information
acknowledged
9. How do you evaluate Ubar staff in terms of their attitudes?
Very Bad Bad
Neither Good
nor Bad Good Very Good
Courtesy
Empathy
Friendliness
Helpfulness

27. 10. How do you evaluate Ubar staff in terms of their problem solving skills?
Very Bad Bad
Neither Good
nor Bad Good Very Good
Patience
Willingness to help
Clarity and concision in
presenting solutions
Quick reaction
Now we would like you to tell us your expectations to changes in Ubar imagine that it is going to be
reconstructed. Please check the box that describes exactly what you expect Ubar to renovate or add.
11. How would you like Ubar's offerings to be?
Very Bad Bad
Neither Good
nor Bad Good Very Good
Food
Drink
Entertainment Facilities
Social Events
12. What is important to Ubar in terms of their offerings?
Not at all
Important
Very
Unimportant
Neither
Important nor
Unimportant
Very
Important
Extremely
Important
The number of food
offered

28. Not at all
Important
Very
Unimportant
Neither
Important nor
Unimportant
Very
Important
Extremely
Important
The quality of drink
The wide range of
entertainment facilities
(eg. the availability of
karaoke, juke box,
bowling, etc.)
The variety of social
events
13. What is important to Ubar offerings in terms of other characteristics?
Not at all
Important
Very
Unimportant
Neither
Important nor
Unimportant
Very
Important
Extremely
Important
Number of options to
choose
Waiting time to be served
14. What do you consider to be important in terms of Ubar services for their dependability?
Not at all
Important
Very
Unimportant
Neither
Important nor
Unimportant
Very
Important
Extremely
Important
Safety
Reliability
Availability

29. 15. How would you like Ubar staff to become in terms of the following attributes?
Very Bad Bad
Neither Good
nor Bad Good Very Good
Attitudes
Communication Skills
Problem Solving Skills
Information
acknowledged
16. What do you consider to be more important for a Ubar staff?
Attitudes
Communication Skills
Problem Solving Skills
Information acknowledged
Personality
17. What do you consider to be important in terms of staff's attitudes?
Not at all
Important
Very
Unimportant
Neither
Important nor
Unimportant Very Important
Extremely
Important
Courtesy
Empathy
Friendliness
Helpfulness

30. 18. What do you consider to be important in terms of staff's problem skills?
Not at all
Important
Very
Unimportant
Neither
Important nor
Unimportant
Very
Important
Extremely
Important
Patience
Willingness to help
Clarity and concision in
presenting the solutions
Quick reaction
19. How likely would you go to Ubar after its reconstruction?
Very Unlikely Unlikely Undecided Likely Very Likely
Your likeliness to go to
Ubar