INTRODUCTION:

House is considered as one of the basic important thing for happy living. In India housing is not purely a shelter but also a stuff of self satisfaction and superiority in the society. In last three decades factors like rapid urbanisation, growing economy, high salary, and easy bank loans encourage housing. These factors also had given a considerable boost to the housing sector. This boosts not only increasing the housing sector but also persuade the home buyers’ priority towards home ownership. One of the important characteristics which influence the priority is age at which one owns a house and the attitude towards it. In current scenario the age of home ownership transform from fifties to thirties.

Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM 2010) says that inIndia the standard age of home buyers’ have come down by twenty two years. In buying aresidential apartment, not all apartment buyers’ had a good experience still some of themwere suffered quietly. Dissatisfaction was due to the rejection of the project by the irresponsible construction companies, poor quality and services provided by the company and delay in handover the flat to the customers. In order to know the customer satisfaction level towards the residential apartments, we conducted a research on apartment buyers of Kerala.The data used for this research is collected from the100 apartment buyers in the outskirts of Ernakulam District of Kerala.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE:

Bruin and cook (1997) explored that behavioral characteristic like residential characteristics, safety and security and friendly relationship with their neighborhood pose are the powerful factors of housing satisfaction. Ukoha, O.M (1997) found that the satisfaction is based on the services provided by the construction company. The satisfaction level also depends on some economic factors like economy benefit, improvement in quality of life, planning and environmental issues.

Oliver (1981), founds that customer expectation is directly proportional to customer satisfaction. Customers build their expectations on the basis of buyers’ past buying experience, words of mouth and statement made the competitors and marketer and their promises. Betty Jo White (1981) states that customers’ difficulties with home buying process are evaluated and the instrument listing 66 potential difficulties were faced by the consumers during the home buying process.

Carolyn, S.T (1998), suggest that customers’ shows their frustration and dissatisfaction and take harsh actions like legal actions against the developers due to some reasons like take long time for handovering the project, not fulfilled promises and poor services. Liu (1999) found that both physical and social factors influence the residential satisfaction. A customer satisfaction is mainly depends on cleanliness and maintenance of the flat. Al-Momani (2000) examined the quality in service provided by the construction company and also the researcher evaluates the service quality by using SERVQUAL gap analysis. He found that the construction company pays little attention to the customer needs like customization and this leads to poor performance of the company.

Djebarni and Al-Abed (2000), found that customers who purchase their flat for low cost are highly dissatisfied with the facilities provided by the construction company. Apartment size is one of the important factors to evaluate the customer satisfaction. Soetanto (2001) suggest that performance of a construction company should be improved to increase the customer satisfaction level. Satisfactory performance of thecompany leads to maintain harmonious relationship with the customers’.

Parker and Mathews (2001), states that satisfaction can be measured by determine the relationship between the customer expectations and what they received. This method is widely used to measure the customer satisfaction level. Maloney (2002) states that customer as an organization that includes the interest of the construction service buyer, potential users and other interest groups. Novak, Jeffery Michael (2008) indicates that customer satisfaction is measured by comparing buyers’ satisfaction and perception based on their location. Isabelina Nahmens (2009) in the article named”Discovering the variables that influences new home buyer service satisfaction” found that higher income, price and larger house size are the factors that influence home buyer satisfaction. Hui and Zheng (2010) revealed that high quality service is an important Variable to Measure the Customer Satisfaction. HE found that service quality have larger impact on satisfaction of home buyers’ than the management quality.

Santiago (2001), in the article “Low income home ownership: does it necessarily mean sacrificing neighborhood quality to buy a home?” states that low Income homebuyers may be forced to buy a home in disadvantaged region. This is a latent problem because Buying home in such region may limit appreciation, may reduce the quality of life. Demir (2010) found that satisfaction level is high for elder customers and customers with high Income because customers can customize their apartment based on their income level.

Mustafa (2012), suggests that buying behavior model and the gap analysis model are used to calculate the satisfaction level. The author use delivery system as an independent variable and house buyer characteristics as a moderate variable to measure the satisfaction level of the customer.Melissa Martin (2013) states that two sets of customer satisfaction measures are find from the home building company to evaluate its performance they are future financial performance and association timing between the customers and the company. He founds that timing has a large impact in customer satisfaction measures.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM:

The concept of house buyer satisfaction is an important measure for judging the success of housing development in an economy. Most of the researches on house buyer satisfaction are focus on to the construction process like customization. The aim of this study is to evaluate the apartment buyers’ satisfaction using the factors like price, location, quality, handover time and apartment buyer characteristics among the

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY:

Objectives of the study are following:

· To evaluate the buyer’s satisfaction in residential apartments.

· To study the apartment buyers’ characteristic.

· To analyze the factors that lead to satisfaction of apartment buyers.

· To find out the relation between various factors and level of satisfaction.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

The area of study covers Ernakulam District, of Kerala. A standard questionnaire was prepared to look for the observation of customers on location, price, quality, amenities and customers characteristics. A total of 100 questionnaires were collected and evaluated. The customers were selected based on random sampling method. The tools used to evaluate the data were:

· Percentage analysis

· Frequency Analysis

· Chi-square Analysis

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION:

The data collected from the customers are scientifically presented under different headings. They are:

• Section A: It deals with data analyzed using percentage analysis.

• Section B: It deals with data evaluated using statistical analysis such as Chi square analysis and Frequency analysis.Demographic factors are analysed to elicit information about various questions like

Ø Who buys

Ø When buys

Ø How buys

TABLE 1: Demographic characteristics of apartment buyers

Factors		In Percentage
Age	Under 25	06
	25-35	44
	35-45	25
	45-55	07
	Above 55	18
Qualification	SSLC	5
	Degree	28
	Post Graduation	14
	Diploma	11
	Professional Degree	42
Monthly Income	Below 25,000	7
	25,000 – 50,000	28
	50,000 - 75,000	53
	Above 75,000	12
Occupation	Govt. Employee	7
	Professional	45
	Business	22
	Pvt.Employee	11
	Retired.	15
Location	Corporation	43
	Municipality	52
	Punchayath	05
Length of Residence	Below 1 year	32
	1-3 years	47
	Above 3 years	21

Source: Primary data

The data collected from the respondents were scientifically evaluated. Based on the Percentage analysis, the interpretations are given below:

· Majority of the customers are Male gender (59%). As a head of the family male gender are more concentrated in apartment buying to improve their social status in the economy.

· Most of the respondents are between 25-35 age groups (44%). In this average age group people wants to settle in their life.

· Most of the respondents are Professionally Qualified (42 %).

· Most of the respondents are under the income group of 50,000-75,000 (53%)

· Most of the respondents are under the occupation group of Professionals (45%).

· Almost all the respondent are in residing in corporation and Muncipalities ie Urban areas (95%).

· Most of the respondents (47%) are lived in their apartment for about 1-3years

Section B:

Frequency Analysis:

Frequency analysis is used for looking at detailed information on nominal data and describing the results.

Table 2: Location of the Apartment

Location	Frequency & Percentage
Strongly Agree	46
Agree	32
Neutral	8
Disagree	11
Highly Disagree	3

From the above table 2, most of the respondents (46%) strongly agree that location is an important factor to increase the satisfaction level of the customers.

Table 3: Quality of the Apartment

Quality	Frequency & Percentage
Strongly Agree	23
Agree	47
neutral	10
Disagree	17
Highly Disagree	3

Table 3 shows that most of the respondent (47%) agrees Quality as an important factor to improve the satisfaction level of the customers.

Table 4: Price of the Apartment

Price	Frequency & Percentage
Strongly Agree	28
Agree	42
neutral	12
Disagree	13
Highly Disagree	5

Table 4 shows that most of the respondent (42%) agrees Quality as an important factor to improve the satisfaction level of the customers.

Table 5: Amenities of the Apartment

Amenities	Frequency & Percentage
Strongly Agree	25
Agree	45
neutral	10
Disagree	13
Highly Disagree	7

Table 5 shows that most of the respondent (45%) agrees that Amenities as an important factor to improve the satisfaction level of the customers.

Chi-square analysis:

Chi-square analysis is used to analyze the significant relationship between two factors. The analysis was carried out at 5% level of significance Ho (P<0.05): There is no significant relation between the various factors and customer satisfaction.

Table 6: Chi-Square Analysis.

Factors	Chi-Square	Df	Asymp. sig	Hypothesis
Your apartment offer adequate safety and security.	2.887	1	0.102	P>0.05, Ho is rejected
Your apartment is easy to maintain	5.887	1	0.006	P>0.05, Ho is rejected
Your apartment offers better amenities like Gym, parking, play area etc	1.382	1	0.162	P>0.05, Ho is rejected
Your apartment provides domestic helper	0.887	1	0.111	P>0.05, Ho is rejected
Your apartment offers better waste disposal system	3.887	1	0.022	P>0.05, Ho is rejected

Hypothesis:

There is a significant relationship between availability of adequate safety and security and the satisfaction level (P>0.05) It is inferred that better safety and security will leads to increase in the satisfaction level of the customers.

Hypothesis:

There is a significant relation between the easy maintenance of apartments and the satisfaction level (P>0.05). So it is inferred that if the apartments are easy to maintain better will be the level of satisfaction among the customers.

Hypothesis:

There is a significant relationship between the satisfaction level and the amenities offered along with the apartment (P>0.05). It is inferred that the apartments with better amenities like gym, parking facilities, play area etc leads to increase in satisfaction level of the customer.

Hypothesis:

There is no significant relationship between the satisfaction level and availability of domestic helper. (P<0.05). So it is inferred that Apartment offers domestic helpers will have influence on satisfaction of customers.

Hypothesis:

There is a significant relationship between the satisfaction level and the waste disposal system. (P>0.05). It is inferred that better the Waste disposal system prevailing in apartments more will be the satisfaction level.

FINDINGS AND SUGGESTIONS:

Findings:

Following are the research findings

· Location is the most important factor which influences the satisfaction level of apartments in Kerala.

· Most of the respondent’s satisfaction level is increased by improving the Quality.

· Most of the respondents’ feel price is an important factor to increase the satisfaction level.

· There is a significant positive relationship is exist between safety and security and apartment satisfaction.

· There is a significant positive relationship is exist between amenities of apartments and level of satisfaction.

· There is a significant positive relationship is exist between availability of domestic helper and the level of satisfaction.

· There is a significant positive relationship is exist between waste disposal system and the level of satisfaction of apartment buyers in Kerala

Suggestions:

Following are the suggestions given based on the findings.

· The construction company should take care of their customer needs and must provide

· Customization to increase the satisfaction level of the customers.

· Offering better and improved amenities along with the apartment will increase the satisfaction level of the customers.

· Safety, security and convenience are the three major factors look upon by an apartment buyer. The company can improve these factors and increase the level of satisfaction.

· Quality, Price, Location and Amenities are the four major pillars of satisfaction of apartment buyers in Kerala.

CONCLUSION:

This paper brings out the major factors that increase the satisfaction level of apartment buyers Kerala. This helps the construction companies to understand the minds of their customers to improve their satisfaction level. The important factors to be considered are the Location, Price, Quality and Amenities of the Apartments. Along with this the apartment should also provide adequate safety and security, proper facilities, waste disposal systems etc. Satisfied customers are the better marketing tool for the builders/companies. Dissatisfied customers’ may create negative word ofmouth. This paper would provide better platform in defining and discovering future possible research in the field of customer satisfaction of apartment industries.

REFERENCES:

1. Al-Momani, A.H. (2000) “Examining service quality within construction processes” Technovation, 20, pages 643-651.

2. Anna M. Santiago(2010)“Low-income homeownership: does it necessarily mean sacrificing neighborhood quality to buy a home?”, Volume 32, Issue 2, pages 171–198

3. Betty Jo White (1981)”Factors Underlying Consumer Difficulties with the Home buying Process”, Volume 10, Issue 2, pages 181–191

4. Bruin, M.J. and Cook, C.C (1997) “Understanding Constraints and Residential Satisfaction among Low-Income Single-Parent Families”, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 29, pages 532-553.

5. Carolyn, S.T., and Gladys Gray, V. (1998) “Satisfaction with manufactured housing”, Journal of family and consumer sciences, 90(3), 60-65.

6. Dekker, K. Vos, S., Musterd, S. and Kempen, R. (2011) “Residential satisfaction in housing estate in European cities: A multi level research approach”, Housing Studies, vol.26, pages 479-499.

7. Djebarni, R. and Al-Abed, A. (2000),”Satisfaction level with neighborhoods in lowincome public housing in Yemen”, Property Management, Vol. 18 No.4, pages 230-242.

8. Fang, Yiping (2012) “Residential satisfaction conceptual; framework revisited: A study on redeveloped neighborhoods in inner city Beijing”, pages 193-195.

9. Holm, M.G. (2000). “Service quality and product quality in housing refurbishment”, The international journal of quality and reliability management”, vol.17 (Iss. 4/5), 527.

10. Hui, E.C.M and Zheng, X. (2010),” Measuring customer satisfaction of FM service in housing sector: A structural equation model approach”, Facilities, vol.28 No. 5/6, pages 306-320.

11. Isabelina Nahmens (2009)”Discovering the variables that influence new home-buyer service satisfaction”, Volume 33(5), pages 581–590

12. Liu, A.M.M (1999) “Residential Satisfaction in Housing Estates: A Hong Kong Perspective”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 8, pages 511-524.

13. Maloney, W.F (2002) “Construction product/service and customer satisfaction”, Journal of construction engineering and management, November/December, pages 522-529.

14. Melissa Martin (2013) “The Effect of Measurement Timing on the Information Content of Customer Satisfaction Measures”, volume 28(2), pages 192-200.

15. Mustafa, A. and Maznah, G. (2012) “House buyers’ satisfaction and housing projects in Malaysia: A conceptual framework”, Educational research, vol.3, pages 509-513.

16. Novak, Jeffery Michael (2008)”A comparative analysis of differences in resident satisfaction”, Retention in housing, 20 (3), pages 190-192.

17. Oliver, R.L (1981) “Measurement and Evaluation of Satisfaction process in Retail setting”, Journal of Retailing, 57 (fall): 25-48.

18. Parker, C. and Mathews, B.P (2001),”Customer satisfaction: Contrasting academic and consumers’ interpretations”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 19(1), pages 38- 46.

19. Soetanto, R. Proverbs, D.G, and Holt G.D (2001),”Achieving quality construction project s based on harmonious working relationships”, International journal of quality and reliability management, vol.18 no.5, pages 528-548.

20. Ukoha, O.M. and Beamish, J.O. (1997) “Assessment of residents’ satisfaction with Public housing in Abuja, Nigeria.” Habitat International, 21(4), 445-460.

Received on 05.10.2017 Modified on 06.11.2017

Asian Journal of Management. 2018; 9(1):342-346.

DOI: 10.5958/2321-5763.2018.00053.7