This talks about the solution of one of the RM Case study which is about the Videocon Industries.

1. REPORT
ON
CASE STUDY
Videocon Industries Limited
Submitted to
Dr. Shailendra Kumar
By
Shashwat Shankar (IMB2018017)

2. Methodology:
Suppose the Videocon is interested in assessing “brand shift” in its favor as a result of the
consolidation strategy than to operate thus research programme, it has to address various
issues such as should the company be using comparative scaling techniques or
noncomparative scaling techniques?
Comparative Scaling Technique:
→ Scaling is the process which has come from the social sciences which attempt or tries to
measure the order of attributes with respect to the quantitative attributes
Comparative Scaling is the technique which involves the direct comparison of stimulus objects.
For example: A questionnaire could be prepared and the respondent could be asked directly about
the preference. The data can only be interpret the attributes in relative terms.
Some of the characteristics of scaling are that can be related to the case are:
i) Description
ii) Order
iii) Distance
iv) Origin
Description:-In the term of description, company should give unique label for its product present. This
could be used to designate eachvalue of the scale. For example: Ascompany wasfacing problem related
to the sharp depreciation of rupee and global slowdown it could have given unique labels to this
problems in their questionnaire so that it could be evaluated statistically.
Order:-Order could be given to these variables like the most selling product could be given the values
which are likely to be greater than and then order could be denoted by such as less than and equal to.
This would allow the organization like the Videocon to focus on the products which are not selling to
their full efficiency and thus giving us the output which could help in making the company profitable.
The order could be related by the making things like the market variables could be used for seeing the
behaviour of the customers towards any project. This would help in increasing also awareness for the
product, if it isn’t captured by the market.
Measurement Technique:
Comparative Validity
Level of Measurement:
Ordinal or Rank Order
Scale
Criteria for
measurement Reliability
Graded Pair Comparison
Measurement Scale:
Summated Scaling (Likert
Scale) Sensitivity

3. Distance: This would allow the company to see how much our products selling has affected the other
or one product hasaffectedthe mentality of the other person.This would make the usage of the absolute
difference in the scale which could be expressed in terms of units. This would involve more of the
statistical technique where the use of range or the normal distribution curve could be plotted to make
the scale easier to intricate.
Origin: This would lead to the characteristicsmeanswhere the unique or fixed beginnings of the product
selled by the Videocon should be known so that company could know in which type of market it has to
launch its upgraded product if any it is planning to do so.
Types of comparative scaling
Paired Comparison: It allows us to find out which are the most important factors in determining the
demand for a product.
For example of Videocon taken:
The company finds why the product is not buy by the customers:
- Too much expensive
- Too much vulnerable
- Very difficult to use
- The maintenance is bad
- From net
The question might be put as:
Which one of the following is the important factor before buying an electronics device?
“The cost” or the “maintenance”
From net
One of the advantages of paired questioning is that it is possible to measure the order of importance
from the respondent, while he or she is never asked to think about more than two factors at the same
time.
Paired Comparison
Graded Paired
Comparison
Unity Sum
Gained
Technique

4. If the company decides to use the non-comparative scaling techniques then should it be
continuous scale, Likert scale, semantic differential scale or staple scale?
How will the company decide about the nature and description of the scale? What will be
the physical form of the proposed scale?
First of all for using of the non-comparative scaling would involve the usage of the scale which contains
the response or the multiple item scale because it would allow the organization to do the survey which
would be having multiple variables for the measurement.
The kind used by the Likert scale according to me would be most appropriate because in each question,
a statement is presented in which a respondent must indicate a degree of agreement or disagreement on
the basis of multiple choice.
Some of the advantages the Likert Scale used by the company can be applied as follows:
i) The responses which are recorded by the employee of the organization could be easily
quantifiable and subjective to computation which means the layman till the most educated
person of the company could be able to fill the data and the survey is easily statistically
designed so that conclusions could be drawn.
ii) The company wants to use most of his money in making of the product as market has
slowdown and rupee has also fallen, so the survey of this type using Likert Scale would be
very cheap and thus making it most appropriate for the use.
A typical circumstance is that a scientist needs to quantify something, (for example, extroversion); the
analyst makes a rundown of proclamations that portray practices and inclinations.
I would like to add that the Likert scale is commonly used in market research for survey purposes to
assess response to an item/idea. The idea is to remove any potential bias that may be introduced by only
presenting certain options to the respondent.
It is very important that there be a neutral term and symmetry on both sides of the neutral term.
Therefore, Likert scales generally have either 5 or 7 options presented in them.
The expression "scale" is utilized both to portray the arrangement of reaction alternatives for every
individual articulation and question (reaction choices on a scale from emphatically differ to
unequivocally concur), and to depict the aggregate scale score that is acquired by summing or averaging
scores over a rundown of inquiries or explanations. (This is to some degree sad phrasing since it can
make disarray or vagueness.)
SUMMARIZING LIKERT ITEMS BY FORMING A TOTAL SCALE SCORE
We can consolidate the numerical evaluations over a rundown of things (for instance, proclamations
about extroversion) by including (or averaging) the scores crosswise over things. In any case, before
we do this, we have to think about a few issues.
To begin with, are the announcements or inquiries worded/scored in a similar bearing? On the off
chance that the extroversion scale incorporated the announcement "I feel cumbersome conversing with
outsiders", at that point a score of 5 would compare to low extroversion. On the off chance that there
are any switch worded things, scoring must be changed with the goal that a score of 5 (for instance)
dependably relate to a larger amount of the trademarkbeing estimated (extroversion in this illustration).

5. Second, is it sensible to surmise that every one of the things in the rundown "measure a similar thing"?
Factor examination and Cronbach's alpha inward consistency unwavering quality can be utilized to
assess this.
Third, how would we like to deal with scoring if there are missing scores on a few things? Inside SPSS
for instance, there are numerous choices. A total discourse of missing information taking care of is a
long ways past the extent of this answer, however it is an issue that ought to be considered.
Fourth, would we like to give diverse weights to things? Generally add up to scale scores are simply
unit weighted totals, that is, we simply include the numerical appraisals crosswise over things. In the
event that for reasonsunknown the things utilize distinctive scales,we may change all things to z scores
before summing crosswise over things. Spared factorscoresare a case ofa strategy to consolidate scores
crosswise over Likert compose things utilizing weights that speak to the quality of relationship of every
thing or question with some basic develop.
How the company will be able to meet the criteria of reliability, validity and sensitivity?
Validity: The validity of content taken in use by the company can be said by:
→ The logical reasoning for the getting of the variables which affect the sales of the product could
be one aspect to find the content validity
→ The content which is a measuring instrument appears to be valid of on the surface which means
the questions about the showdown of the market or the rupee could also be involved in the
making of the content valid as this variable affects the most for the selling of the product.
Reliability: The contents reliability as discussed could be defined by the nature of the variable taken for
the use and how the respondent responds to the same question in different environment. This could be
more customer centric as the reliability of the questions would depend on the respondent’s mind and
respondent’s environment present.
Sensitivity: This would allow the company to find the meaningful difference which arises from the
similar variables used in the questionnaire. Thus making it sensitive towards the scale. This sensitivity
would depend on both the customer’s & the organizations as what scale is given by the organization &
what scale has been put forward to measure and how is the customer’s mind-set is present towards the
survey and what is the environment in which it is giving the o/ps.