Operation

Running head: OPERATION
Operation

OPERATION 2
Table of Contents
Reasons for selecting the particular method of survey administration, and the advantages and
disadvantages of using this method....................................................................................... 3
Was the administration procedure a success i.e., did respondents understand the questions (look confused
or ask questions)? Was there missing data (i.e., skipped questions)? On average, how long it takes for
respondents to complete the survey....................................................................................... 4
What suggestions would you make for improving the administrative procedure used?........................4
What, if any changes, would you make to the questionnaire before administering it to a larger group of
respondents?................................................................................................................... 5
On reflection, what were the key lessons you learned from the survey administration process?.............6
Revise questionnaire the Changes being made.........................................................................7
References................................................................................................................... 13
Appendices.................................................................................................................. 15
Complete 10 questionnaire............................................................................................ 15
Result of questionnaire through monkey survey..................................................................19

OPERATION 3
Reasons for selecting the particular method of survey administration, and the advantages
and disadvantages of using this method
The primary reason for selecting the quantitative technique with respect to survey administration
is to develop the responses related to investigation issues within a quantitative form. Moreover,
both open and close-ended questions were used to collect the responses from participants
regarding the dining experience of a boutique restaurant. In such way, the first section was
related to general questions such as uniqueness, food quality, customized design, and very
personal service. These kinds of survey administration tool are beneficial to develop detail
information regarding the dining experience of customers (Yüksel, 2017).
By using this technique, I have addressed the motivation of customers to buy dining experience
at the boutique restaurant. I have pointed out that in the second section, the close-ended question
was used to understand the perception about the customers with respect to servicescape,
authenticity, staff empathy and experience that persuades future behavioral intention. This type
of question was used as it facilitates the opportunities to select one option from alternatives. This
technique is beneficial as it takes less time. In the last section, I have developed my
understanding regarding the demographic factors such as age, gender and income group of
customers (Filimonau, et. al., 2017).
I have also increased my understanding of the Likert scale tool. It entails several alternatives as
well as, facilitates the chances for choosing one of them. The key benefit of using survey
administer is that research collects the data as per the real-world perception. Another
advantageous of using survey is to create a large amount of data within minimum time as well as,
reasonable costs (Hair Jr, et. al., 2015).

OPERATION 4
But, this survey technique has some limitation. The infeasibility of information can be eliminated
while an investigator emphasizes detail facts and figures to resolve the issues of research. The
data collected through this tool would be possible to involve the inadequate data on the concern
being researched. This technique ensures a large number of responses through the survey. But, it
can be difficult with respect to managing specifically, while it implemented through the post. It
is complex while the survey is collected through over telephone as well as, face to face (Omar,
Ariffin, and Ahmad, 2016).
Was the administration procedure a success i.e., did respondents understand the questions
(look confused or ask questions)? Was there missing data (i.e., skipped questions)? On
average, how long it takes for respondents to complete the survey
I have applied the administrative procedure that was beneficial to collect the information
regarding the research issue through respondents. During the survey, I have pointed out that there
is some number of participants who have complexity to understand the question as they had
queries from researcher till solution of questions. There are some participants who have skipped
the questions with respect to secret information as they experience insecure to interact about the
personal data like gender, age as well as, income. This survey has taken a high amount of
respondents like 1 hour and 30 minutes to accomplish the survey questions (Brace, 2018).
What suggestions would you make for improving the administrative procedure used?
I will recommend increasing the quantity for e-mails that can be opened and collected through
respondents to gain the rate of responses through the survey. It can be recommended that a large
number of participants who have clicked on the start button of the survey have completed the
survey. A researcher can choose the right participants from whom they can send a survey

OPERATION 5
through an invitation on email. It can also make sure that respondents would open the email
technique (Rae, et. al., 2015).
I can suggest that an investigator can develop the designing associated with research technique.
The questions that will be asked may carefully design as well as, piloted through an interview
with monkey survey questionnaire techniques. In addition, the different issue could be
considered in the structuring of the questionnaire such as planning the content for research
technique, the format of questionnaire, covering letter, piloting as well as, interview questions
(Vedovato, et. al., 2016).
I would also like to suggest an investigator apply the structure of the questionnaire for improving
the procedures of administration. The questionnaire used in the survey should be comprehensible
as well as clear. The use of capital letter could be eliminated as this kind of structure could be
harder to interpret. I would also recommend to the investigator to use the piloting technique. This
technique can be accessed via a pilot sample related to the targeted population. Furthermore, this
technique would permit me to develop the structure regarding the questionnaire (Polsky, et. al.,
2016).
What, if any changes, would you make to the questionnaire before administering it to a
larger group of respondents?
I will like to make certain changes in the survey through the questionnaire before distributing a
large number of respondents. I will also identify the questionnaire in terms of assessing whether
this kind of questionnaire would be beneficial for both investigators and consumer or not. In
addition, I will also avoid that that questionnaire that cannot be related to research objective in
order to completion of a research study in a methodological manner. I will emphasize on the

OPERATION 6
questionnaire that would take the fewer time of consumers as well as, it would be also supportive
for eliminating the monotony through the survey (Yang, and Sung, 2016).
I would also make a change in those questionnaires that do not make sense and inappropriate for
respondents. I will also address the language for a survey that can be explicit as well as,
uncomplicated as respondents can offer responses to each question as compared to skipping the
questions. I will create the survey through the questionnaire before distributing to a higher group
of respondents. In such a way, it could be effective for considering the target publication in mind
before developing the survey. These changes are essential to avoid the mistakes and errors
through survey and supporting the consistent outcome (Gray, and Malins, 2016).
On reflection, what were the key lessons you learned from the survey administration
process?
I have improved my learning from the administration process of the survey. In such a way, I
have created my understanding that primarily, a researcher can identify the concerns and
objectives of the research. This process was effective for identifying the impact of servicescape,
authenticity, staff empathy and experience that influence future behavioral intention. I have
created my understanding regarding the predetermined population. I have also improved my
understanding with regarding keeping the privacy of participants. In this way, it can be illustrated
that privacy related to data of participants would secure in terms of obtaining reliable responses
through a survey (Yang, and Sung, 2016).
From section A, I have observed that a researcher has discussed with respondents regarding the
general questions about dining experience in the boutique restaurant. They have also asked
regarding the uniqueness, food quality, customized design and very personal service of the
boutique restaurant. From section B, I have developed my experience regarding the Likert scale.

OPERATION 7
In such a way, I have observed that the Likert scale entails several options like strongly agree,
agree, neutral, disagree, and strongly disagree. I have developed my knowledge that questions
should rely on the research issue (Vedovato, et. al., 2016). I have also increased my learning that
the key motivation for collecting the data through participants is to gather in-depth information
related to the dining experience. Throughout section C, I have developed my knowledge that a
researcher should ask with participants regarding the demographic data such as age, gender, and
race. This learning will be beneficial for me to create a questionnaire in the future (Polsky, et. al.,
2016).
Revise questionnaire the Changes being made
The survey is completed on 10 customers who have taken dining experience from a boutique
restaurant. For this survey, 1225 restaurants were selected. The monkey survey techniques were
used for performing the survey. The following steps were used in piloting the questionnaire used
for the survey. In such manner, some questions were rephrased as well as, some were removed
with the transparency. It is demonstrated as given below:
Changes to question 4 of section A:
Wording: Changes in question 4 of section A
4. What was the main reason for your dining at this boutique restaurant? (Tick one box only)
Family outing Outing with
friends
Business
purposes
Special
occasion
Other
-----------------
Final: What was the main reason for your dining at this boutique restaurant?
Family outing Outing with
friends
Business
purposes
Special
occasion

OPERATION 8
Wording: Changes in question 5 of section A
Pilot: 5. Who were you dining with? (Tick one box only)
Alone Business Associate Family and
friends
Spouse/partner
Final: Who were you dining with?
Alone Business Associate Family and
friends
Spouse/partner
Wording: Changing in question 6 of section B
Pilot: 6. Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements in relation
to the Servicescape of the boutique restaurant you most recently visited with
1= Strongly Disagree 7= Strongly Agree
Architectural style of this restaurant is attractive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Interior décor is visually appealing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Natural elements are pleasant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Décor personally designed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Furniture is of high quality 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Temperature is just right 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Aroma is enticing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Noise level is acceptable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Air quality is good 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Colors create a warm atmosphere 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Restaurant lighting is appropriate 1 2 3 4 5 6 7