Lampiran 1 Kuesioner Penelitian Yth. Responden Dalam rangka memenuhi penelitian, saya sebagai mahasiswa Universitas Katolik Widya Mandala Surabaya,

Transkripsi

1 Lampiran 1 Kuesioner Penelitian Yth. Responden Dalam rangka memenuhi penelitian, saya sebagai mahasiswa Universitas Katolik Widya Mandala Surabaya, sangat mengharapkan kesediaan Bapak/Ibu/Sdr/i meluangkan sedikit waktu untuk mengisi kuesioner mengenai penelitian dengan judul Pengaruh Merchandise, Store Atmosphere, Dan Store Service Terhadap Pemilihan Format Toko Pada Toko Pakaian Polo Di Surabaya. Untuk itu, jika Anda berumur minimal 17 tahun dan pernah melakukan berbelanja pada format toko POLO yang berbeda yaitu Departement store dan Speciality store Surabaya, saya mohon kesediaan Anda untuk mengisi kuesioner dibawah ini dengan jujur dan benar. Data atau informasi yang terkumpul hanya akan saya gunakan untuk keperluan peneliti\an. Saya mengucapkan banyak terima kasih atas partisipasi yang diberikan. Hormat Saya, (Devilia M. Christhie)

2 Petunjuk: Isilah biodata Anda dan beri tanda Centang ( ) pada kotak pilihan di bawah ini. Jenis Kelamin Umur Status Pekerjaan Penghasilan atau Pendapatan per bulan Tempat belanja Favorit Baju Polo Laki-laki Perempuan tahun >25-35 tahun >35-45 tahun >45-55 tahun >55-65 tahun >65 tahun Pelajar / Mahasiswa Wiraswastawan PNS Karyawan Swasta Polri, TNI Lainnya / Sebutkan.. < Rp ,- > Rp ,- s/d Rp ,- > Rp ,- s/d Rp ,- > Rp ,- s/d Rp ,- > Rp ,- Toko Polo (toko yang tidak berada di luar departement store) Departement Store (Sogo, Matahari, dll) Berilah tanda Centang ( ) pada salah satu jawaban yang Anda pilih. Keterangan: SS = Sangat Setuju S = Setuju N = Netral TS = Tidak Setuju STS = Sangat Tidak Setuju

3 NO PERTANYAAN STS TS N S SS Merchandise 1 Saya merasa variasi produk yang dijual di Polo sangat beragam. 2 Saya merasa Polo memiliki produk yang lengkap. 3 Saya merasa Polo selalu menjual produk dengan kualitas terbaik. 4 Saya merasa Polo cepat dalam mendistribusikan produk baru ke toko-tokonya NO PERTANYAAN STS TS N S SS Store atmosphere 1 Saya merasa tampil layout di gerai Polo menarik 2 Saya merasa penataan produk di gerai Polo menarik 3 Saya merasa suasana di gerai Polo nyaman 4 Saya merasa layout di gerai Polo memudahkan saya bergerak mencari produk. NO PERTANYAAN STS TS N S SS Service 1 Saya merasa pramuniaga Polo cukup terampil dalam melayani kebutuhan konsumen 2 Saya merasa papan petunjuk kategori produk di Polo memudahkan saya mencari barang 3 Saya merasa pramuniaga Polo cepat tanggap dalam mengatasi kebutuhan konsumen. --Terima kasih atas partisipasi Anda

4 Lampiran 2 Jawaban Responden No M1 M2 M3 M4 SA1 SA2 SA3 SA4 S1 S2 S3 D

5

6

7

8 Lampiran 3 Karakteristik Responden Jenis Kelamin Jumlah Prosentase (%) Pria 61 61,0 Wanita 39 39,0 Total ,00 Usia Jumlah Prosentase (%) Tahun Tahun Tahun Tahun Tahun 7 7 Lebih dari 65 Tahun 3 3 Total ,00 Pekerjaan Jumlah Prosentase (%) Pelajar / Mahasiswa Wiraswastawan PNS Karyawan Swasta Polri, TNI 8 8 Lainnya 3 3 Total ,00 Pengeluaran Jumlah Prosentase (%) Kurang dari Rp Rp Rp Rp Rp Rp Rp Lebih dari Rp Total ,00

9 Lampiran 4 Uji Validitas dan Reliabilitas Uji Validitas variabel Merchandise Correlations M1 M2 M3 M4 TM M1 Pearson Correlation **.652 **.654 **.886 ** Sig. (2-tailed) N M2 Pearson Correlation.626 ** **.462 **.809 ** Sig. (2-tailed) N M3 Pearson Correlation.652 **.621 ** **.829 ** Sig. (2-tailed) N M4 Pearson Correlation.654 **.462 **.508 ** ** Sig. (2-tailed) N TM Pearson Correlation.886 **.809 **.829 **.799 ** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

10 Uji validitas variabel Store atmosphere Correlations SA1 SA2 SA3 SA4 TSA SA1 Pearson Correlation **.844 ** ** Sig. (2-tailed) N SA2 Pearson Correlation.668 ** ** ** Sig. (2-tailed) N SA3 Pearson Correlation.844 **.586 ** ** Sig. (2-tailed) N SA4 Pearson Correlation ** Sig. (2-tailed) N TSA Pearson Correlation.898 **.792 **.861 **.435 ** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

11 Uji validitas variabel Service Correlations S1 S2 S3 TS S1 Pearson Correlation **.635 **.859 ** Sig. (2-tailed) N S2 Pearson Correlation.598 ** **.852 ** Sig. (2-tailed) N S3 Pearson Correlation.635 **.615 ** ** Sig. (2-tailed) N TS Pearson Correlation.859 **.852 **.877 ** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

12 Uji Reliabilitas variabel Merchandising Case Processing Summary N % Cases Valid Excluded a 0.0 Total a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha N of Items Scale Mean if Item Deleted Item-Total Statistics Scale Variance if Item Deleted Corrected Item- Total Correlation Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted M M M M

13 Uji Reliabilitas variabel Store atmosphere Case Processing Summary N % Cases Valid Excluded a 0.0 Total a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha N of Items Scale Mean if Item Deleted Item-Total Statistics Scale Variance if Item Deleted Corrected Item- Total Correlation Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted SA SA SA SA

14 Uji Reliabilitas variabel Service Case Processing Summary N % Cases Valid Excluded a 0.0 Total a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha N of Items Scale Mean if Item Deleted Item-Total Statistics Scale Variance if Item Deleted Corrected Item- Total Correlation Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted S S S

15 Lampiran 5 Statistik deskriptif Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation M M M M TM M SA SA SA SA TSA SA S S S TS S Valid N (listwi se) 100

16 Lampiran 6 Output Diskriminan Sampel Validasi Analysis Case Processing Summary Unweighted Cases N Percent Valid Excluded Missing or out-of-range group codes At least one missing discriminating variable Both missing or out-of-range group codes and at least one missing discriminating variable Total 0.0 Total

17 Group Statistics Valid N (listwise) D Mean Std. Deviation Unweighted Weighted 1.00 M SA S M SA S Total M SA S Tests of Equality of Group Means Wilks' Lambda F df1 df2 Sig. M SA S Pooled Within-Groups Matrices a M SA S Covariance M SA S Correlation M SA S a. The covariance matrix has 18 degrees of freedom.

18 Covariance Matrices a D M SA S 1.00 M SA S M SA S Total M SA S a. The total covariance matrix has 19 degrees of freedom. Log Determinants D Rank Log Determinant Pooled within-groups The ranks and natural logarithms of determinants printed are those of the group covariance matrices. Test Results Box's M F Approx..539 df1 6 df Sig..779 Tests null hypothesis of equal population covariance matrices.

19 Eigenvalues Functio n Eigenvalue % of Variance Cumulative % Canonical Correlation a a. First 1 canonical discriminant functions were used in the analysis. Wilks' Lambda Test of Functio n(s) Wilks' Lambda Chi-square Df Sig Standardized Canonical Discriminant Function Coefficients Function 1 M SA.857 S.559

20 Structure Matrix Function 1 SA.902 S.505 M.222 Pooled within-groups correlations between discriminating variables and standardized canonical discriminant functions Variables ordered by absolute size of correlation within function. D Functions at Group Centroids Function Unstandardized canonical discriminant functions evaluated at group means

21 Classification Processing Summary Processed 20 Excluded Missing or out-of-range group codes At least one missing discriminating variable Used in Output Prior Probabilities for Groups Cases Used in Analysis D Prior Unweighted Weighted Total Classification Function Coefficients D M SA S (Constant) Fisher's linear discriminant functions

22 Classification Results b,c D Predicted Group Membership Total Original Count % Cross-validated a Count % a. Cross validation is done only for those cases in the analysis. In cross validation, each case is classified by the functions derived from all cases other than that case. b. 90.0% of original grouped cases correctly classified. c. 85.0% of cross-validated grouped cases correctly classified. Sampel Analisis Analysis Case Processing Summary Unweighted Cases N Percent Valid Excluded Missing or out-of-range group codes At least one missing discriminating variable Both missing or out-of-range group codes and at least one missing discriminating variable Total 0.0 Total

23 Group Statistics Valid N (listwise) D Mean Std. Deviation Unweighted Weighted 1.00 M SA S M SA S Total M SA S Tests of Equality of Group Means Wilks' Lambda F df1 df2 Sig. M SA S Pooled Within-Groups Matrices a M SA S Covariance M SA S Correlation M SA S

24 Pooled Within-Groups Matrices a M SA S Covariance M SA S Correlation M SA S a. The covariance matrix has 78 degrees of freedom. Covariance Matrices a D M SA S 1.00 M SA S M SA S Total M SA S a. The total covariance matrix has 79 degrees of freedom.

25 Log Determinants D Rank Log Determinant Pooled within-groups The ranks and natural logarithms of determinants printed are those of the group covariance matrices. Test Results Box's M F Approx df1 6 df Sig..000 Tests null hypothesis of equal population covariance matrices. Eigenvalues Functio n Eigenvalue % of Variance Cumulative % Canonical Correlation a a. First 1 canonical discriminant functions were used in the analysis.

26 Wilks' Lambda Test of Functio n(s) Wilks' Lambda Chi-square Df Sig Standardized Canonical Discriminant Function Coefficients Function 1 M.324 SA.867 S.220 Structure Matrix Function 1 SA.891 S.498 M.364 Pooled within-groups correlations between discriminating variables and standardized canonical discriminant functions Variables ordered by absolute size of correlation within function.

27 D Functions at Group Centroids Function Unstandardized canonical discriminant functions evaluated at group means Classification Processing Summary Processed 80 Excluded Missing or out-of-range group codes At least one missing discriminating variable 0 0 Used in Output 80

28 Prior Probabilities for Groups Cases Used in Analysis D Prior Unweighted Weighted Total Canonical Discriminant Function Coefficients Function 1 M SA.411 S.366 (Constant) Unstandardized coefficients

29 Classification Results b,c Predicted Group Membership D Total Original Count % Cross-validated a Count % a. Cross validation is done only for those cases in the analysis. In cross validation, each case is classified by the functions derived from all cases other than that case. b. 91.3% of original grouped cases correctly classified. c. 91.3% of cross-validated grouped cases correctly classified.