MT494 Unit 4 Planner Survey Research Summary Example

Eighty-Three Planners and Six Calls, Limits Stated: An MT494 Unit 4 Marketing Research Summary for Sandberg Lanes

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

MT494: Bachelor's Capstone in Marketing

Unit 4 Marketing Research Summary

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

Sandberg Lanes, the chamber, the survey responses and the interviews are composite; the sources cited are real.

Method

The survey ran for three weeks through the member newsletter of the regional chamber of commerce, which reaches about 1,400 member businesses in the Quad Cities. It asked people who had planned or approved a work outing in the past two years to answer twelve questions about how they choose a venue, when they prefer to hold events, what they spend and what they think of several venue types. It drew 83 usable responses after four incomplete ones were removed. Six respondents who had planned an outing in the past year agreed to a twenty-minute follow-up call, and those calls explored the reasons behind their answers. The full questionnaire is in the appendix, item by item.

The design followed the advice of Dillman et al. (2014) on short, mobile-friendly questionnaires with one idea per question, and the ranking question listed criteria in random order for each respondent so that position would not bias the result.

The follow-up calls used a short guide of five open questions: how the last outing was chosen, who else was involved, what went well, what went badly, and what would make the respondent book a venue they had not used before. Notes were taken during each call and coded afterward by theme, so that a point counted as a theme only when at least two of the six people raised it independently. Quotations are kept general enough that no employer can be recognized.

Finding One: What Planners Rank First

Respondents ranked six criteria for choosing a venue. Everyone being able to take part came first for 56 of 83 respondents, or 67 percent. One invoice covering everything came second overall, food included in the price third, and price per guest fourth. Location and novelty trailed. The interviews explained the order: planners said the worst outcome of an outing is a group where half the staff stand around while the other half play, and an outing that leaves people out reflects on the person who planned it.

Price came in fourth, a result that may startle owners who have long competed on being the cheapest lanes in town.

The result does not mean price is unimportant. Approvers care about cost per head, and several interviewees said they would not take a venue above about $40 per guest to their manager. It means price is a threshold rather than the deciding factor once a venue clears it.

Finding Two: When Planners Want to Meet

Asked when they would prefer to hold a work outing, 48 of 83 respondents, or 58 percent, chose a weekday afternoon between one and five. Weekday evenings drew 22 percent and weekends 11 percent; the rest had no preference. Interviewees gave the same reason in different words: an afternoon outing happens on paid time, nobody gives up an evening with family, and attendance is higher. These are the hours when Sandberg Lanes' lanes sit emptiest, which makes this the finding most directly tied to the business problem.

Finding Three: Awareness and Image

Thirty-four respondents, 41 percent, said they had never considered a bowling center for a work event. When asked to describe bowling centers in a few words, the most common answers were fun, casual and inexpensive, but dated and smoky also appeared in about one answer in five. Three of the six interviewees described memories of smoke-filled centers from decades ago, although indoor smoking has been banned in Illinois workplaces and public places since 2008. The summary reports this as a perception for the positioning to address, not as a judgment about the building itself.

Finding Four: Who Plans and Who Pays

Fifty-nine respondents, 71 percent, said they planned outings but needed someone else to approve the spending. The interviews confirmed the split found in the situation analysis: planners look for ease, and approvers look for a cost per person they can defend. Two interviewees said they had chosen a venue mainly because it sent a single, clear quote within a day.

Finding Five: Group Size and Spending

Respondents reported the size and cost of their most recent outing. The median group was 22 people, and three outings in four had between 12 and 45 guests. The median spend was about $30 per guest including food, and 80 percent of respondents spent less than $40. Those figures matter for two decisions. Sandberg's 24 lanes can seat six bowlers each, so even a group of 45 uses fewer than half the lanes, and two groups could share an afternoon. And a package priced between $29 and $39 per guest would sit inside what most of these planners already spend, which supports the interviewees' view of price as a threshold.

Secondary Data

County Business Patterns counts of mid-sized employers in the two-county area, used in Unit 3, set these findings in context. If the survey's share of respondents favoring weekday afternoons held for the wider market, which it may not, more than half of the roughly 790 employer outings a year would be candidates for a weekday slot. The figure is offered only to show scale.

Limits

Three limits shape how far these results can be trusted. First, the sample frame was chamber members, who skew toward larger and more established employers; very small businesses and nonmembers were not reached. Second, respondents chose themselves, and people who enjoy planning outings may have been more likely to answer. Third, 83 responses is a small sample, so percentages can shift by several points with a handful of answers. Because the sample was not drawn at random, no margin of error is reported; Fowler (2014) cautions that sampling error calculations assume a probability sample, and quoting one here would claim a precision the survey does not have. The results describe these 83 planners and six interviewees, not every employer in the Quad Cities.

Implications

Each finding leads to a decision in a later unit. The planner and approver split points the targeting in Unit 5 toward employers and toward messages for two roles. The participation finding gives the positioning in Unit 6 a claim that rivals with small rooms cannot match. The preference for weekday afternoons tells the budget in Unit 8 where to concentrate. The dated image tells the promotion to show the center as it is now, with photographs of recent groups. Kotler and Keller (2016) describe research as useful only when it changes a decision, and these four findings each change one.

References

Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method (4th ed.). Wiley.

Fowler, F. J., Jr. (2014). Survey research methods (5th ed.). SAGE.

Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Marketing management (15th ed.). Pearson.