INDUSTRY PROFILE

A stock broker who also works as a customer service coordinator works to

ensure that all aspects of the companies business with regards to investing
and handling client's funds and portfolios are completed to the client's
satisfaction. This means that all activities with regards to the buying and
selling of investments is done with the various laws and regulations as set
down by the Securities and Exchange Commission or other governing body.

A customer service coordinator for a stock brokerage ensures that customers

receive their statements and have access to up to the minute information
about their accounts. Since the stock market is always changing immediate
access is very important when trading stocks or commodities. The customer
service coordinator handles all issues or complaints by clients and while
they may not resolve them personally they ensure that the proper authority
within the brokerage is alerted of the concern or problem.

A customer service coordinator should have excellent communication skills

and should be comfortable dealing with complaints and individuals that may
be upset or verbally aggressive. Since most of the contact will be done by
phone the customer service coordinator must be able to get the necessary
information from the customer or client to determine the problem, know
how to resolve the issue or whom to speak with in the brokerage to get the
issue resolved, and then provide follow up to the customer.

Some issues such as data entry mistakes or other issues can often be dealt
with directly by the customer service coordinator without any other
assistance.

1
Common work activities include:

• Answering phone calls, emails, faxes and written requests for

information or clarification of problems or issues with accounts.
• Communicating effectively with the clients to discover the exact
concern and then correcting the problem to the customer's satisfaction.
• Providing information to others in the company when the issue is
beyond the scope of the customer service coordinator to correct.
• Following up with clients to provide complete service and make sure
all concerns have been addressed.
• Completing reports, phone logs or other documentation of customer
calls and issues.

2
 BROKING FIRM PROFILE

Networth stock broking limited [NSBL], listed on BSE since 1994, started
its journey as a stock broking house. With market maturing and the
investors’requirements becoming more diverse, it has evolved with time and
today, offers a whole range of investment products and services.

Networth has been successfully providing premium financial services and

information for more than a decade. Its aim has consistently been to
empower investors to take charge of their financial future & help them grow
their Networth.

Networth constantly focus on scaling and upgrading the technology

infrastructure so as to provide the best services to associates & investors.
Has a presence in around 340 centers across India. Network includes around
260 Business Associates who share our success story. It is managed by a
talented team of around 1600 professionals and are serving over 100,000
clients.

The company provides the entire gamut of financial services, be it Mutual

Funds, Insurance, Equity trading, IPOs or even Loans, through one single
window. It provides to Business Associates with some of the best available
technology to enhance their clients’experience.

3
Companys online back office “my networth”and online transaction
platform “e‐transact”are amongst the best in the industry. They are a
corporate member of BSE, NSE & MCX SX. This enables us to trade in
equities, derivatives and currency products.

They are members of MCX and NCDEX through our subsidiaries. This
enables us to trade in commodity derivatives. Depository Participant with
NSDL and CDSL. This enables to offer depository services.They have been
appointed as a national level distributor for all mutual funds.

company have been enlisted as a corporate agency for life and general
insurance. Its in house Software Division is ISO 9001:2000 Certified. It
provides customized and ready to use software which enables seamless
processing and execution. Theyadhere to a well defined risk management
system & settlement mechanism thereby being compliant at every stage.

4
 OBJECTIVES

1. To identity the factors that determines the brokers service quality

2. To measure the satisfaction of customers towards service quality of

broking industry

5
 NEED FOR THE STUDY

The stockbroking industry is a service-oriented industry where brokers act

as agents for investors when a security is bought or sold and are
compensated with a commission. Investors would not hesitate to switch to
alternative brokerage houses if they do not obtain satisfaction. Providing
quality service and hence customer satisfaction should thus be recognised as
a key strategy and a crucial element of long-run success and profitability for
stockbroking businesses.

6
 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The scope of the study is to measure the customized banking service quality
in networth stock broking ltd and to ensure quality initiatives leading to
soundness of the process and procedure making it the only differentiator and
key continuing success from competitors,finding the limitations and
bringing improvements.

7
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN

RESEARCH MEANING:

Research can be described as a systematic and organized effort to

investigate a specific problem encountered in the work setting that needs
solutions. This entire process by which we attempt to solve problem is
called research.
Research thus encompasses the process of inquiry, investigations,
examination and experimentation. These processes have to be carried out
systematically, diligently, critically, objectively, and logically.

METHODOLOGY:

Methodology is defined as “the study of methods by which we gain

knowledge, it deals with cognitive process imposed on research by the
problems rising from the mature of its subject matter.

TYPEOF RESEARCH:

Descriptive research
Descriptive research has been used, it involves surveys and facts findings
enquire of different kinds the major purpose of description of the state of
affairs, as it exists at present.
The main characteristics of this method are that the research has no control
over the variable; he can only report what happened or what is happening.
The method of research utilized in descriptive research is survey methods of
all kind, including comparative and correlation method.

8
RESEARCH INSTRUMENT:

The research instrument used in this study “structured questionnaire”.

Structured questionnaire are those in which there are predetermined
question relating to the aspect for which the researcher collects data. The
question relating to the aspect for which the research collects data. The
questions are presented with exactly the same wording and in the same
order to all the respondents.

QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN:

The structure questionnaire foe effectiveness of the modern recruitment

practices with the following types of questionnaire open ended, close ended,
multiple choice, types of question.

DATA COLLECTION:

Data refers to information or facts. It includes numerical figures, non

numerical figures, description facts, and qualitative information. The task of
data collection begins after research problem has been defined and research
plan has been decided. The nature of the data is primary and secondary.

9
Primary data:
The primary data are those that are collected through questionnaire and
direct interview. The questionnaire was framed in such a manner to obtain
correct information, graded suitably for the study.
Secondary data:
The secondary data has been collected through oral communication.
Secondary data about the company profile and other details were collected
from the company website.

SAMPLING PROCEDURE:

Convenience sampling has been used in this study. Convenience sampling is

used for selecting of homogeneous sample for the study. It refers to
selection a sample study. It is a non probability sampling. Thus research
study may include study objects, which are conveniently located. Research
findings based on convenient sampling however, cannot be generalized.

SAMPLE SIZE:

Due to time and resources constraints the sample size has been taken as 100
for survey in consultation with the company guide and the project guide.

PERIOD OF THE STUDY:

The study was undertaken for a period of 15 days from August 5th to 20th.
During the period the following steps were taken.
 Objectives were set and questionnaire was finalized.

 Data were collected and recorded.

 Data were analyzed and interpreted

10
 Report were generated

PILOT SURVEY:

A pilot survey with 10 samples from employees was conducted for tasting
the validity of the questions. It was found that there was no need for
changes in the questionnaire and hence the same questionnaire was used for
final survey also.

STATISTICAL TOOLS:

The statistical tool used for the analysis are

 Frequency analysis.

 Chisquare.

11
 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Service Quality

Quality is the cornerstone for success in any business and is perceived as a

key factor in acquiring and sustaining competitive advantage (Hampton,
1993; Shearden, 1988). Providing service quality improves satisfaction of
customers and this is believed to lead to favourable behavioural intentions
and to ultimately affect business success (Iacobucci, Grayson and Ostrom,
1994). Establishing service quality may be the only way of differentiating
oneself. That is why many existing businesses are using enhanced service
quality to position them more competitively both domestically and globally
(Parasuraman et al., 1988; Brown and Swartz, 1989).

The most widely accepted measurement scale for service quality is the
SERVQUAL instrument developed by Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry
(PZB) (1988). They define service quality as the “difference between what
a service company should offer and what it actually offers” or the
discrepancy between expectations and perceptions of the service
performance.

To measure customer satisfaction with different aspects of service quality,

Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1988) developed a survey research
instrument called SERVQUAL. It is based on the premise that customers
can evaluate a firm’s service quality by comparing their perceptions of its
service with their expectations.The SERVQUAL instrument is based on five

12
service quality dimensions that include reliability, responsiveness,
assurance, empathy and tangibles (Zeithaml and Bitner, 2000) and they
provide the basic “skeleton” underlying service quality, which is
represented as a multidimensional construct.

Customer Satisfaction

The concept of customer satisfaction has been used by consumer behaviour

and marketing researchers. Researchers consider customer satisfaction as a
part of consumer behaviour whereas practitioners treat it as a focal point for
designing successful marketing strategies. The majority of approaches view
customer satisfaction as a cognitive process (Bloemer and Poiesz, 1989).
The widespread approach to the definition of customer satisfaction is
therefore that it is “the accumulated experience of a customer’s purchase
and consumption experiences” (Andreassen, 1995). Klaus (1985) defines
satisfaction as “the customer’s subjective evaluation of a consumption
experience based on some relationship between the customer’s perceptions
and objective attributes of the product”. Thus, customer satisfaction is
treated as an “abstract and theoretical phenomenon, it can be measured as a
weighted average of multiple indicators” (Johnson and Fornell, 1991, in
Andreassen, 1995).

“Satisfaction is a person’s feelings of pleasure or disappointment resulting

from comparing a product’s perceived performance (or outcome) in relation
to his or her expectation” (Kotler, 2001). As this definition makes it clear,
satisfaction is a function of perceived performance and expectations. If the
performance falls short of expectations, the customer is dissatisfied. If the
performance matches the expectations, the customer is satisfied. If the
performance exceeds expectations, the customer is highly satisfied or
delighted. Despite the fact that the definition varies, the common factor is
13
that satisfaction is a post-consumption evaluative judgement (Westbrook
and Oliver, 1991).

Satisfaction is believed to strengthen beliefs and attitudes whereas

dissatisfaction may create negative beliefs and attitude towards the object
(Assael, 1987). A revised attitude appears as a result of satisfaction or
dissatisfaction with the experience (Mayo and Jarvis, 1981; Oliver, 1981;
Moutinho, 1987). The result would be an increase or decrease in the
likelihood of repeat business for the investment. Moreover, the intensity of
an attitude may influence the level of satisfaction with an object. In other
words, if the attitude is positive, satisfaction results. Similarly,
dissatisfaction is expected when the attitude is negative. As such, as stated
earlier, satisfaction or dissatisfaction with a previous experience is crucial
because it may affect expectations for the next purchase (Westbrook and
Newman, 1978).

14
 LIMITATIONS OF THE SURVEY

 Time was the main constrain. The project should be completed

within the stipulated time limit

 Since the project is of qualitative nature, there was participants’ bias

in some cases.

 The survey study was base on a sample survey of 100

 Most of the respondents were less cooperative when approached.

15
 ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

Gender frequency percent

male 90 90.0
female 10 10.0
total 100 100.0

16
Inference:majority of respondents 90% were male.

Age of the Frequency Percent

respondents
20-30 14 14.0
31-40 34 34.0
41-60 47 47.0

17
Above 60 5 5.0
Total 100 100.0

Inference : majority respondents were within the age group of 41-60yrs.

Occupation Frequency Percent

Government 21 21.0
Private 30 30.0
Business 32 32.0
Others 17 17.0
Total 100 100.0

18
Inference: Among options majority respondents were business people
32%.

Client level Frequency Percent

Online 68 68.0
Offline 32 32.0
Total 100 100.0

19
Inference: majority of respondents were online 68%.

Timely Frequency Percent

completion of
work
S. Agree 13 13.0
agree 41 41.0
neutral 18 18.0
disagree 15 15.0
S. disagree 13 13.0
Total 100 100.0

20
Inference: 41% agree ,15% disagree to the timely completion of work.

problem Frequency Percent

solving
S. Agree 12 12.0
agree 43 43.0
neutral 20 20.0
disagree 21 21.0
S. disagree 4 4.0
Total 100 100.0

21
 Inference: 43% agree , 20% neutral,21% disagree to the
problem solving.

keeping the Frequency Percent

promise
S. Agree 17 17.0
agree 30 30.0
neutral 34 34.0
disagree 12 12.0
S. disagree 7 7.0
Total 100 100.0

22
 Inference: majority 34% were neutral , 30% agree to the
promise keeping.
knowledge Frequency Percent
level of the
employees
S. Agree 17 17.0
agree 36 36.0
neutral 23 23.0
disagree 18 18.0
S. disagree 16 16.0
Total 100 100.0

23
Inference: majority 36% agree to the knowledge level of employees.

The Frequency Percent

employees are
courteous?
S. Agree 19 19.0
agree 31 31.0
neutral 20 20.0
disagree 14 14.0
S. disagree 16 16.0
Total 100 100.0

24
 Inference: majority 31% agree that employees were courteous.
Does the Frequency Percent
employee
instills
confidence?
S. Agree 4 4.0
agree 38 38.0
neutral 47 47.0
disagree 4 4.0
S. disagree 7 7.0
Total 100 100.0

25
Inference: 47%eutral,38%agree to the employees instills confidence.

The Frequency Percent

employees are
polite
S. Agree 15 15.0
agree 42 42.0
neutral 32 32.0
disagree 6 6.0
S. disagree 5 5.0
Total 100 100.0

26
 Inference: 42% agree,32% were neutral to politeness of
employees.
Individual Frequency Percent
attention
S. Agree 2 2.0
agree 24 24.0
neutral 10 10.0
disagree 38 38.0
S. disagree 26 26.0
Total 100 100.0

27
 Inference: 38% disagree,26% strongly disagree to individual
attention.

Interest Frequency Percent

Protection
S. Agree 15 15.0
agree 40 40.0
neutral 21 21.0
disagree 20 20.0
S. disagree 4 4.0
Total 100 100.0

28
 Inference: majority 40% agree to interest protection by
company.

Recommendatio Frequency Percent

n of stocks
S. Agree 13 13.0
agree 31 31.0
neutral 24 24.0
disagree 16 16.0
S. disagree 16 16.0
Total 100 100.0

29
 Inference: 31% agree,24% were neutral to recommendation of
stocks.

Provision of Frequency Percent

daily reports
S. Agree 47 47.0
agree 38 38.0
neutral 11 11.0
disagree 3 3.0
S. disagree 1 1.0
Total 100 100.0

30
 Inference: majority 47% agree to provision of daily reports.

Confidential Frequency Percent

Transaction
S. Agree 8 8.0
neutral 48 48.0
neutral 27 27.0
disagree 8 8.0
S. disagree 9 9.0
Total 100 100.0

31
 Inference: majority 48% agree to confidential transaction.

Accurate Frequency Percent

information
S. Agree 24 24.0
agree 47 47.0
neutral 15 15.0
disagree 8 8.0
S. disagree 6 6.0
Total 100 100.0

32
 Inference : majority 47% agree that company provides accurate
information.

Personal Frequency Percent

Information
S. Agree 11 11.0
agree 48 48.0
neutral 25 25.0
disagree 7 7.0
S. disagree 9 9.0
Total 100 100.0

33
 Inference: majority 48% agree to confidentiality of personal
information.

Technological Frequency Percent

improvement
S. Agree 11 11.0
agree 15 15.0
neutral 31 31.0
disagree 30 30.0
S. disagree 13 13.0
Total 100 100.0

34
 Inference: 31% were neutral,30% disagree to technological
improvement.

inconvenience Frequency Percent

in the past
Yes 67 67.0
No 33 33.0
Total 100 100.0

35
Inference: majority 67% faced inconvenience in the past.

36
reasons for Frequency Percent
inconvenience
Communication 31 31.0
Process/Procedure 15 15.0
Inexperienced 17 17.0
Employees
others 4 4.0
not applicable 33 33.0
Total 100 100.0

Inference: majority 31% faced communication as inconvenience.

37
 Overall Frequency Percent
Satisfaction
Highly 12 12.0
Satisfied
Satisfied 34 34.0
neutral 31 31.0
Dissatisfied 11 11.0
Highly 12 12.0
Dissatisfied
Total 100 100.0

Inference: 34% satisfied,31% were neutral to overall satisfaction.

38
Chisquare:To determine whether there is a significant association between
age and overall satisfaction level.

H0: There is no significant association between age and overall satisfaction

level.

H1: There is significant association between age and overall satisfaction

level.

Value df Asymp.
Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson 21.562 12 .043
Chi-
Square
Likelihood 23.872 12 .021
Ratio
Linear-by- .009 1 .923
Linear
Associatio
n
No of 100
Valid
Cases

Inference:From the table the value .043 is less than .05, hence there is
significant association between age and overall satisfaction level.

Chisquare:To determine whether there is a significant association between

employees politeness and overall satisfaction level.
39
H0: There is no significant association between employees politeness and
overall satisfaction level.

H1: There is significant association between employees politeness and

overall satisfaction level.

Value df Asymp.
Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson 56.450a 16 .000
Chi-
Square
Likelihood 56.693 16 .000
Ratio
Linear-by- 3.056 1 .080
Linear
Associatio
n
No of 100
Valid
Cases

Inference:From the table the value .000 is less than .05, hence there is
significant association between employees politeness and overall
satisfaction level.

Chisquare:To determine whether there is a significant association between

recommendation of stocks and overall satisfaction level.

40
H0: There is no significant association between recommendation of stocks
and overall satisfaction level.

H1: There is significant association between employees recommendation

of stocks and overall satisfaction level.

Value df Asymp.
Sig. (2-
sided)
a
Pearson 29.647 16 .020
Chi-
Square
Likelihood 30.671 16 .015
Ratio
Linear-by- .370 1 .543
Linear
Associatio
n
No of 100
Valid
Cases

Inference:From the table the value .020 is less than .05, hence there is
significant association between recommendation of stocks and overall
satisfaction level.

Chisquare:To determine whether there is a significant association between

accuracy and overall satisfaction level.

41
H0: There is no significant association between accuracy and overall
satisfaction level.

H1: There is significant association between accuracy and overall

satisfaction level.

Value df Asymp.
Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson 28.538a 16 .027
Chi-
Square
Likelihood 29.101 16 .023
Ratio
Linear-by- 2.396 1 .122
Linear
Associatio
n
No of 100
Valid
Cases

Inference:From the table the value .027 is less than .05, hence there is
significant association between accuracy and overall satisfaction level.

Chisquare:To determine whether there is a significant association between

technological improvement and overall satisfaction level.

42
H0: There is no significant association between technological improvement
and overall satisfaction level.

H1: There is significant association between technological improvement

and overall satisfaction level.

Value df Asymp.
Sig. (2-
sided)
a
Pearson 30.819 16 .014
Chi-
Square
Likelihood 28.520 16 .027
Ratio
Linear-by- .652 1 .419
Linear
Associatio
n
No of 100
Valid
Cases

Inference:From the table the value .014 is less than .05, hence there is
significant association between technological improvement and overall
satisfaction level.

Chisquare:To determine whether there is a significant association between

inconveniences and overall satisfaction level.

43
H0: There is no significant association between inconveniences and overall
satisfaction level.

H1: There is significant association between inconveniences and overall

satisfaction level.

Value df Asymp.
Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson 2.929a 4 .570
Chi-
Square
Likelihood 3.063 4 .547
Ratio
Linear-by- 966 1 .326
Linear
Associatio
n
No of 100
Valid
Cases

Inference:From the table the value .570 is greater than .05, hence there no
is significant association between inconveniences and overall satisfaction
level.

Chisquare:To determine whether there is a significant association between

Individual attention and overall satisfaction level.

44
 H0: There is no significant association between Individual attention and
overall satisfaction level.

H1: There is significant association between Individual attention and

overall satisfaction level.

Individual Value df Asymp.

attention Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson 18.415a 16 .300
Chi-
Square
Likelihood 19.605 16 .239
Ratio
Linear-by- .244 1 .621
Linear
Associatio
n
No of 100
Valid
Cases

Inference:From the table the value .300 is less than .05, hence there is significant
association between Individual attention and overall satisfaction level.

45
 FINDINGS

 Most of the customers for stock brokers 90% were male.

 Most of the brokerage customers belong to age group of 41-60 years

47% and the least is above 60 years.

 Most of the customers who banked were businessmen 32%and least

is government people.21%.

 online clients are more compared to offline clients 68%.

 Majority of clients agree with timely completion of work. 41%

 Majority of clients agree with interest shown by company in solving

problem 43%

 Majority of clients are neutral towards promise keeping 34%.

46
 Majority of clients agree that knowledge level of employee are
good.36%

 Majority of clients agree that employees are courteous 31%

 Majority of clients are neutral towards confidence given by

employees 47%

 Majority of clients agree that employees are polite 42%

 Majority of clients disagree that employees give individual attention

38%

 Majority of clients agree that employees protects there interests 40%

 Majority of clients agree that employees give recommendations on

stocks 31%

 Majority of clients stronglyagree that employees provides daily

transactions 47%

47
 Majority of clients 48% agree that employees carries transactions
confidentially.

 Majority of clients agree that employees inform about financial

operations accurately 47%

 Majority of clients agree that employees are confidential in

maintaining personal information 48%

 Majority of clients disagree 30% towards technological

improvement.

 Majority of clients 67% have experienced inconvenience in the past.

 Majority of clients 31% faced communication as the inconvenience

and least is process/procedures.

 Majority of clients 34% are overall satisfied with company.

 There is significant association between age and overall satisfaction

level

 There is significant association between employees politeness and

overall satisfaction level
48
 There is significant association between recommendation of stocks
and overall satisfaction level

 There is significant association between accuracy and overall

satisfaction level

 There is significant association between technological improvement

and overall satisfaction level

 There is no significant association between inconveniences and

overall satisfaction level

 There is significant association between individual attention and

overall satisfaction level

49
 SUGGESTIONS

 Infrastructure should be improved by the company.

 Individual attention to be given.

 Detailed explanation of process and procedures to be given.

 Communication gap to be reduced

 Effective training should be provided for employees by management

 Employees should communicate in regional language.

50
 CONCLUSION

To meet the demands of today’s marketing

environment,organizations are looking to initiate service as a means to
create or sustain competitive advantage.measuring customer satisfaction is
critical to the process of serving the customer. from the study conducted it is
evident that the service quality with high standards have instilled confidence
among customers have enabled to create concrete relationship beyond
broking.

51
 Questionnaire

1. Name:

2. Gender : Male Female

3. Age: 20-30 31-40 41-60 Above 60

4. Occupation : Government Private Business Others

5. Client level : Online Offline

Questions

Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Agree Disagree
1 When company promises to do
something by a certain time ,it does so

2 When you have a problem ,the

company shows sincere intrest in
solving it
3 Company provides its service in time
according to promise
4 Employees in company have
knowledge to answer your questions
5 Employees are consistently courteous
with you
6 Employees instills confidence in you
7 Employees are polite with you
8 Company gives you individual
52
 attention
9 Company protects your interests
1 Company gives adequate
0 recomentations of stocks/other
avenues
1 Company provides your daily
1 transaction
1 Company carries your transactions
2 confidentially
1 Company informs about financial
3 operations accurately
1 Company is confidential in
4 maintaining your personal
information
1 Adapting Technological Improvement
5

6. Did you experience any kind of inconveniences with the company

Yes No

7. If yes,what were the reasons , please tick

Communication Process/procedure Inexperienced employees Others

8. Please state your level of satisfaction with the company

Highly satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Highly dissatisfied

Suggestions if any:

53
 BIBILIOGRAPHY

 Web sites
www.networthdirect.com
www.wikipedia.com
www.google.com

 Journals/articles
Analysis of gap in service quality through SERVQUAL
The determinants of service quality
Improving measurement of service quality.

54