Thesis

Critique
Title: CHANNEL OF DISTRIBUTION DECISION : EFFECTIVENESS IN MEETING COMPANY OBJECTIVES
Critique: Based on the hypothesis, the research is mainly on the opinions and not on the actual data of the company such as sales.

Suggestion: The effectiveness of the channel distribution decision by the managers as perceived by the employees
Specifically, this research sought answers to the following question:
1. What is the status of the distribution system of the company when assessed according to :

1.1 type of intermediaries currently used

1.2 number of employees at distribution and shipping centers

1.3 mode of transportation used, and

1.4 number of warehouses managed?

2. To what extent do the following factors influence the management decision in the choice of channel of distribution:

2.1 availability of products in the market

2.2 cost of distribution

2.3 management control of the sales force

2.4 availability of financial resources for distribution functions, and

2.5 Dominance of the procedure in the market?

3. How significantly do the opinions of the respondents differ with respect to the extent of influence of the above mentioned factors in the choice of channel of
distribution decision, when they are grouped according to length of service in the current position?

4. Based on the opinions of the respondents, how effective is the managers’ decision in the choice of channel of distribution in meeting the company objectives
in terms of:

4.1 Sales volumes

4.2 Competition

4.3 Production specialization, and

4.4 Amount of profit?

 5. How significant is the difference in the opinions of the respondents on the effectiveness of the managers’ decision in the choice of channel of distribution in
meeting the company objectives when grouped according to department affiliation?

Critique: Why use the length of service in the current position as basis for difference?

Suggestion: Survey those who deal with the decision making such as managers instead as they know what they are doing since length of service does not mean
knowledge on the topic.
Ho1: When grouped according to length of service in the current position, the opinions of the respondents regarding the extent of influence of the factors that
influence the manager’s decision in the choice of channel of distribution do not differ significantly.

Ho2: There are no significant differences in the opinions of the respondents on the extent of effectiveness of the channel of distribution in meeting the company
objectives when they are grouped according to department affiliation.
Critique: Why put the length of service in the hypothesis when you use a purposive sampling and one of its criteria is at least two years in the company?

Suggestion: There are no significant differences in the opinions of the respondents on the extent of effectiveness of the channel of distribution in meeting the
company objectives.
Respondents of the study

Sixty two employees of the distribution warehouse and the sales department were the respondents of the study. At the time of the distribution of the questionnaire,
the respective managers were coordinated by the central office, through a memorandum to facilitate early accomplishment of the questionnaire. The numbers of
respondents were, however restricted by their availability at their respective units(more especially to the salesman) at the time of the distribution of the questionnaire.
Critique: What is the total sample size? Are the 62 respondents enough to represent the departments?

Suggestion:Sixty two employees out of XX employees from the distribution warehouse and the sales department were the respondents of the study.

Purposive sampling was used in the selection of the respondents. They were selected based on the following criteria:

 Employee respondents must be permanent in the company

 They must have been assigned to their existing position for at least one year; and

 They must have been in the company for the last two years.

Based on the criteria, there were eight managers and 12 supervisors who qualified for this study while about 25 employees from the distribution, warehouse and
logistics areas and 18 salesman from various regions were tapped. In view of this, a total of 62 respondents participated in the survey.

Critique: In the respondents of the study it stated that the respondents were restricted by their availability, then why state that purposive sampling alone was used?

Suggestion: Say that purposive and convenience sampling was used since they were chosen on their availability.
 Table 1
Profile of the Respondents
Critique: Why is there a logistics department? On the
respondents there were only sales and distribution
Profile Sales Warehouse/Distribution Logistics Total
said. Why is there a status of employment when the
f % f % f % f %
criterion for choosing is that they should be a
Age:
permanent employee?
21-30 yrs. 22 35% 5 8% 27 44%
31-40 yrs 11 18% 13 21% 11 18% 35 56%
Suggestion: Add the logistics department in the
Total 33 53% 18 29% 11 18% 62 100%
respondents. Do not put status of employment since
Civil Status
they have been filtered as to their status of
Single 22 35% 22 35%
employment already.
Married 11 18% 18 29% 11 18% 40 65%
Research Instrument and Techniques Used
Total 33 53% 18 29% 11 18% 62 100%
Department
The following research instrument were used to gather
Sales 33 53% 33 53%
the necessary information:
Warehouse/Distribution 18 29% 18 29%
1. Questionnaire. The questionnaire was the
Logistics 11 18% 11 18%
primary data gathering equipment. The first
Total 33 53% 18 29% 11 18% 62 100%
part of the questionnaire covered the inquiry
Status of Employment
on the status of the distribution function. Other
Permanent 8 13% 18 29% 11 18% 37 59%
parts, considered to be the major focus of the
Contractual 6 10% 6 10%
questionnaire dealt on inquiries pertaining
Casual 6 10% 6 10%
influences of intermediaries and the
Agency 13 21% 13 21%
effectiveness of channel distribution decisions
Total 33 53% 18 29% 11 18% 62 100%
in realizing company goals.
Length of Service
1-10 yrs 29 47% 29 47%
Validation of the Questionnaire
11-20 yrs 4 6% 8 13% 3 5% 15 24%
21-30 yrs 10 16% 8 13% 18 29%
The survey questionnaire after having been checked
Total 33 53% 18 29% 11 18% 62 100%
and evaluated by the adviser was presented to 10
members of the office staff of the marketing department who were discounted in the actual survey. Their suggestions and comments where valid were incorporated
in the final draft of the questionnaire.

2. Unstructured Interview. Unstructured interviews were conducted with respondents who were chosen at random to augment the data gathered through the
questionnaire. These were used to verify clarify and gather supplementary information about particular issues that were raised in the survey.

3. Documentary Analysis. A review of available documents, such as memoranda, reports and brochures was undertaken to elicit additional information that may
enhance the result of the study.
Critique: Descriptive research was used but there was an unstructured interview. Also why choose random at random when you said these were used to augment
the date gathered?

Suggestion:1. State in the methodology that descriptive research was used but an unstructured interview was used to augment their responses.
2. Rather than choosing at random, pick the respondent with the most knowledge on the issue for the interview to gain more understanding.
Statistical Treatment of Data
The data were gathered were tallied and presented in tabular form on which the following tools were applied.
1. Percentage. Percentage is a measure based on the ration of responses to the number of samples being studied. This was used in the presentation of the
status of the distribution system

2. Weighted Mean. This is a measure of central tendency and was used to determine the weighted average of the responses pertaining to the extent of
influence of the intermediaries on the managers~ distribution decisions and the extent of effectiveness of the decisions in meeting the selected company
goals.
The means were interpreted using the Likert Scale. The criteria that served as the basis of interpretation of the data were based on the boundary of
numerals and corresponding interpretations are illustrated as follows:

Weight Range Symbol Interpretation

VGE To a Very Great Extent
5 4.51-5.00 VE Very Effective
GE To a Great Extent
4 3.51-4.50 E Effective
ME To a Moderate Extent
3 2.51-3.50 ME Moderately Effective
SE To a Little Extent
2 1.51-2.50 LE Slightly Effective
SE ToNno Extent at All
1 1.00-1.50 NE Not Effective at All

3. ANOVA. The analysis of variance is a technique in inferential statistics designed to test whether or not more than two samples (or groups) are significantly
different from each other. This was applied on the extent of influence of identified factors on the managers` decisions on the choice of the channel
distribution decisions.

Critique: Why are there two interpretations on the responses? How would the range be distributed to this interpretation? Why are there same symbols used for the
interpretation?

Suggestion: Choose whether to use the interpretation “Effective” or “Extent” since there is only one range and it would be easier to interpret and it would be
consistent.
 Table 2

Status of the Distribution System of the Company

Profile Sales Distribution Logistics Total

f % f % f % f %
Type of Intermediaries currently used

Wholesalers 3 5% 3 5%
Agent/brokers 0 0
Retailers
Distributors 33 53% 18 29% 8 13% 59 95%
Total 33 53% 18 29% 11 18% 62 100%
Mode of transportation used

Forwarders 30 48% 3 5% 33 53%

Owned Fleet
Truck Jobbers
Hired Vans 3 5% 11 18% 6 10% 20 32%
Other Means 4 6% 5 8% 9 15%
Total 33 53% 18 29% 11 18% 62 100%
Number of Warehouses

Below 5 22 35% 5 8% 27 44%

6-10 11 18% 13 21% 8 15% 32 52%
11-15 3 5% 3 5%
Total 33 53% 18 29% 11 18% 62 100%

Critique: Why are there profiles included with no data?

Suggestion: Remove the profiles with no data since it would just cause confusion. Use a consistency in terms of department since you’ve used
warehouse/distribution in the first table then you should use it also in the other tables.
Table 3

Influence of Availability of Products on the Manager’s

Decision in the Choice of Channel Distribution

Particulars Length of Service

1-10 Years 11-20 Years 21-30 Years Average
WM I WM I WM I WM I
 Using wholesalers 4.00 GE 4.40 GE 4.00 GE 4.13 GE
Using retailers 3.44 ME 4.33 GE 1.67 LE 3.15 ME
Using agent/brokers 3.22 ME 4.00 GE 2.67 ME 3.30 ME
Using distributors 4.50 GE 4.50 GE 4.75 VGE 4.58 VGE
Average 3.79 GE 4.31 GE 3.27 ME

Critique:Are the length of service given true? Based on the age of the respondents only 11 are around 31-40 years old, so does that mean that some of them have
started working before the age of 20?

Suggestion: Confirm the age of the respondents and change as necessary.

Table 4

Influence of Cost of Distribution on the Manager’s Decision in

the Choices of Channel of Distribution

Particulars Length of Service

1-10 Years 11-20 Years 21-30 Years Average
WM I WM I WM I WM I
Using wholesalers 3.56 GE 4.33 GE 4.67 VGE 4.19 GE
Using retailers 3.67 GE 3.50 ME 2.33 LE 3.17 MME
Using agent/brokers 3.78 GE 2.33 SE 3.00 ME 3.04 ME
Using distributors 4.70 VGE 3.75 GE 3.00 ME 3.82 GE
Average 3.93 GE 3.48 ME 3.25 ME

Critique:Shouldn’t the actual cost of distribution be used in this?

Suggestion:Use the actual cost of distribution and compare it with the budget instead
Table 5

Influence of Management Control of Sales Staff on the Manager’s

Decision in the Choices of Channel of Distribution

Particulars Length of Service

1-10 Years 11-20 Years 21-30 Years Average
WM I WM I WM I WM I
Using wholesalers 3.20 ME 3.33 ME 4.00 GE 3.51 GE
Using retailers 2.90 ME 3.25 ME 1.67 LE 2.61 ME
Using agent/brokers 3.80 GE 4.50 GE 2.33 LE 3.54 GE
Using distributors 4.64 VGE 4.25 GE 4.50 GE 4.46 GE
Average 3.63 GE 3.83 GE 3.13 ME
Critique: Are the data based on all the departments? Shouldn’t the data from the sales department be used since they are the affected department?

Suggestion:Use data from the sales department for this part.

Table 6

Influence of Availability of Financial Resources on the Manager’s

Decision in the Choices of Channel of Distribution

Particulars Length of Service

1-10 Years 11-20 Years 21-30 Years Average
WM I WM I WM I WM I
Using wholesalers 3.50 ME 3.33 ME 4.67 VGE 3.83 GE
Using retailers 3.10 ME 3.33 ME 2.67 ME 3.03 ME
Unsing agent/brokers 3.60 GE 3.00 ME 2.67 ME 3.09 ME
Using distributors 3.00 ME 4.20 GE 4.75 VGE 3.98 GE
Average 3.30 ME 3.47 ME 3.69 GE

Critique:Shouldn’t the data come from the Finance Department?

Suggestion: Add the finance department on the respondents to have better view of the financial capability.
Table 7

Influence of Dominance of the Products in the Market on the Manager’s

Decision in the Choices of Channel of Distribution

Particulars Length of Service

1-10 Years 11-20 Years 21-30 Years Average
WM I WM I WM I WM I
Using wholesalers 3.80 GE 4.00 GE 5.00 VGE 4.26 GE
Using retailers 4.10 GE 3.50 ME 2.33 LE 3.31 ME
Unsing
agent/brokers 4.00 GE 3.00 ME 2.67 ME 3.22 ME
Using distributors 4.73 VGE 4.00 GE 4.00 GE 4.24 GE
Average 4.16 GE 3.63 ME 3.50 ME

Critique:Shouldn’t the data used be gathered from the market data and not from the employees?

Suggestion:Use the market data as this will better reflect the dominance of the products.
Table 8
 Ranking of Implied Choices of Channel of Distribution

OVERALL ASSESMENTS
Agents/Broker
Factors Wholesaler Retailers s Distributors
Availability of Products 4.13 3.15 3.30 4.58
Cost of Distribution 4.19 3.17 3.04 3.82
Management Control of Sales Force 3.51 2.61 3.54 4.46
Financial Resources 3.83 3.03 3.09 3.98
Dominance of the Products 4.26 3.31 3.22 4.24
Average 3.98 3.05 3.24 4.22
Rank 2 4 3 K1

Critique: None

Suggestion: Is it possible to present the choices in percentage as it would be more convincing?

Table 9

Analysis of Variance of Opinions on the Influence of Factors on the Manager’s

Decision in the Choices of Channel of Distribution

Particulars MSSb MSSw DFb DFw F-ratio TV Remarks

Accept Ho
Availability of (Not
Products 0.107 0.753 2 9 1.422 4.26 Significant)
Accept Ho
(Not
Cost of Distribution 0.476 0.658 2 9 0.722 4.26 Significant)
Management Accept Ho
Control of Sales (Not
Force 0.533 0.932 2 9 0.572 4.26 Significant)
Accept Ho
Financial (Not
Resources 0.153 0.580 2 9 0.264 4.26 Significant)
Accept Ho
Dominance of the (Not
Products 0.488 0.636 2 9 0.766 4.26 Significant)

Critique: There was a difference of 0.01 on the F-ration of the cost of distribution and dominance of the products.
Suggestion: This is a numerical value so it must be accurate to the last digit but maybe this was due to the rounding of numbers. Please specify which Ho are you
accepting since you have two hypothesis given.
Table 10

Extent of Effectiveness of the Channel Distribution

Decision on Sales Volume

Warehouse/
Particulars Sales Disribution Logistics
WM I WM I WM I
Increase in sales
volume 4.50 E 4.50 E 4.33 E
increase in overall
revenue 3.18 ME 4.25 E 2.67 ME
Decrease in sales
volume 3.18 ME 4.50 E 1.33 LE
Decrease in overall
revenue 3.27 ME 3.50 ME 1.67 LE
Average 3.53 E 4.19 E 2.50 LE

Critique:How was it determined that there was an increase or decrease of sales and revenue when there was no experiment done or pre-test and post-test done?

Suggestion: Use a pre-test and post-test data and have an experiment done on an area then determine if there was an increase or decrease based on that data.
Table 11

Extent of Effective of the Channel of Distribution

Decision on Competition

Warehouse/
Particulars Sales Disribution Logistics
WM I WM I WM I
Putting the company
ahead of
competitors 4.40 E 4.20 E 4.33 E
More products are
available at shelf 4.67 VE 4.00 E 5.00 VE
More inventories at
outlets 4.36 E 5.00 VE 3.40 ME
Using Distributors 4.55 VE 4.67 VE 4.00 E
Average 4.49 E 4.47 E 4.18 E
Critique:Was the data based on the market data?

Suggestion: Use the market data to determine these values as this would reflect better representation of the effectivity.
Table 12

Extent of Effectiveness of the Channel of Distribution

Decision on Product Specialization

Warehouse/
Particulars Sales Disribution Logistics
WM I WM I WM I
More investments
are channeled in
improvements in the
production system 4.00 E 3.75 E 4.33 E
More management
efforts are focused
at upgrading
existing technology 4.67 VE 4.00 E 4.33 E
More investments
are diverted at
developing new
processes 4.36 E 4.25 E 4.30 E
Resources are
utilized instead for
developing new
product features 4.55 VE 4.50 E 3.00 VE

Average 4.49 E 4.13 E 4.00 E

Critique:Was there an experiment done? Is the data based on financial data of the company?

Suggestion: Conduct an experiment and use the data from the experiment. Use the financial data of the company as this would better reflect if the company is
capable of the said particulars.

Table 13

Extent of Effectiveness of the Channel of Distribution

Decision on Amount of Profit
 Warehouse/
Particulars Sales Disribution Logistics
WM I WM I WM I
Reduction in sale
costs 4.00 E 4.20 E 3.33 ME
Reduction in
administrative costs 3.92 E 3.85 E 3.00 ME
Reduction in
production costs 3.73 E 3.50 ME 3.33 ME
Overall increase in
profit 3.64 E 3.75 E 3.00 ME
Average 3.82 E 3.82 E 3.17 ME

Critique: Shouldn’t there be a comparison for this to determine if there was an actual increase or decrease?

Suggestion: Compare it with the previous data and use prediction to determine the percent change. Use percentage to present data since it would better reflect the
change.

Table 14

Analysis of Variance of Opinions on the Extent of Effectiveness of

Managers’ Decision on Channel of Distribution

Particulars MSSb MSSw DFb DFw F-ratio TV Remarks

Accept Ho
(Not
On sales Volume 2.90 0.817 2 9 3.54 3.68 Significant)
Accept Ho
(Not
On competition 0.200 0.223 2 9 0.536 3.68 Significant)
Accept Ho
On product (Not
specialization 0.165 0.211 2 9 0.782 3.68 Significant)
Reject Ho
On amount of profit 0.579 0.049 2 9 11.72 3.68 (Significant)

Critique:There was a mistake in the computation of the F-ratio of “On competition” as this should be 0.897.

Suggestion: Amend to reflect correct values of the F-ratio of “On competition” since this should be 0.897.
Summary of findings, conclusions and recommendations
A total of 62 employees from Sales, Warehousing, and Logistics Departments were selected through purposive sampling and served as respondents of this
research.
1. Distributorship is the dominant intermediary being adopted by the subject company. Personnel office documents show that the Warehouse/Distribution
Department has 35. Only 18 employees are under the Logistics Department

2. Thirty three respondents or 53 percent stated that forwarders are usually used.

3. Twenty respondents comprising 32 percent indicated the use of other means hired vans and nine respondents of 15 percent indicated the use of other
means of transportation, such as the distributors’ vans.

4. Twenty respondents comprising 32 percent indicated the use of hired vans and nine respondents or 15 percent indicated the use of other means of
transportation, such as the distributors’ vans.

5. According to 32 respondents equivalent to 52 percent, the company is operating 6 to 10 warehouses, 2 respondents or 44 respondents reported fewer than
five warehouses. Only three respondents reported 11 to 15 warehouses being managed by the company.

Critique: Why is the number of warehouses being surveyed? Shouldn’t that be taken from company data instead of surveying it?

Suggestion: Use company data for the number of warehouse since it would be useless to survey the number of warehouse when you can actually get actual data
instead of opinionated data.
II. Extent to Which Market Factors Influence the Management Decision in the Choice of Channel Distribution
1. Availability of Products in the market

1.1 All the respondents, regardless of length of service, perceive that the use of wholesalers could ensure the availability of products in the market to a great
extent (means of 4.00 to 4.40).

1.2 The use of retailers to bring products in the market, according to the respondents who have served for up to ten years, is to a moderate extent (mean of
3.44).

1.3 These retailers, however, according to those respondents who have served for 11 to 20 years could influence the availability of the products in the
market to a great extent (means of (4.33) but those who have served for up to 30 years claim that these retailers could ensure the availability of
products in the market to a great extent (mean of 1.67).

1.4 The influence of agents/brokers on availability of products in the market is to moderate extent according to the mean of 3.22 from respondents who have
been with the company for up to 10 years.

1.5 The assessment of the respondents who have served the company for 21 to 30 years is to a moderate extent as indicated by the mean 2.67.

1.6 The respondents who have been in the company for 11 to 20 years consider agents and brokers as influencing the availability of the products in the
market.
 1.7 The use of distributors, according to respondents who have served the company for up to 10 years influences the availability of products in the market to
a great extent, based on the mean of 4.50

1.8 The opinions of the respondents who have been in the company for 21 years to 30 years indicated that the influence of distributors on the availability of
the products in the market is also to a great extent as shown by the mean of 4.50.

1.9 Those who have been with the company for as long as 21 to 30 years stated that the influence of this factor is to a very great extent, gauging from the
mean of 4.75.

Critique: 1. In 1.1 the means reported was in range but there is an average in the table.
2. In 1.3 it is stated that the mean is 1.67 but the interpretation is still “Great Extent”?

Suggestion: 1. The average of 4.13 should be used as mean since it is the average and not the range. Although it would result as same “Great Extent” it is still
better to present it in average since it already given.
2. Interpretation should be “Little Extent” based on the interpretation table.
3. Indicate that the data is from agents/brokers since this might cause confusion
2 Cost of Distribution

2.1 Regardless of length of service the respondents find that using wholesalers influences the cost of distribution to great extent (mean 3.56 to 4.67).

2.2 Using retailers, according to respondents who have served the company for up to 10 years influences the cost of distribution to a great extent (3.67
mean).

2.3 Respondents who have served the company for 11 to 20 years think that retailers influence the cost of distribution to a moderate extent (mean of 3.5).

2.4 Those who have served the company for 21 to 30 years consider retailers as influencing the cost of distribution to a little extent (mean of 3.33).

2.5 The opinions of the respondents who have served the company for up to 10 years, the agents/brokers influence the cost of distribution to a great extent
(mean of 3.78).

2.6 The respondents who have been with the company for 11 to 20 years find the agents/brokers influencing the cost of distribution to a little extent (mean of
2.33).

2.7 The respondents who have been employed for 21 years to 30 years consider the agents/brokers exerting influence on the cost of distribution to a
moderate extent (mean of 3.0).

2.8 The use of distributors, according to respondents who have been with the company for up to 10 years influences the cost of distribution to a very large
extent (mean of 4.70).

2.9 Those who have served the company claim that its influence is to a great extent (mean of 3.75).
 2.10 The respondents who have been employed for 21 years to 30 years consider distributors exerting influence on the cost of distribution to a moderate
extent (mean of 3.0).

2.11 The respondents who have been employed by the company for up to 10 years maintain that these intermediaries influence to a great extent the cost
of distribution.

2.12 The respondents who have served the company for 11 to 30 years find these intermediaries, collectively, influence the cost of distribution to a
moderate extent.

Critique: 1. In 2.1 the means reported was in range but there is an average in the table.
2. in 2.4 the interpretation was “Little Extent” for the mean of 3.33

Suggestion: 1. Use the average of 4.19 reported in the table instead of the range 3.56-4.67.
2. Interpret it as “Moderate Extent”
3 Management Control of Sales Force

3.1 The respondents, who have been with the company for up to 20 years, feel that management control of sales force influences the manager’s decision on
the choice wholesalers to a moderate extent (means of 3.20 to 3.33).

3.2 Those who have been employed for 21 to 30 years believe the influence is to a great extent as indicated by the mean of 4.0

3.3 According to the respondents who have served the company for up to 20 years, management control of sales force influenced the mangers’ decision on
the use of retailers to a moderate extent (mean of 2.90 to 3.25).

3.4 The respondents who have been with the company for 21 to 30 years stated that this factor influences the use of retailers to a little extent only (mean of
1.67).

3.5 In the case of the use of agents/brokers, those who have been employed by the company for up to 20 years think that this is influenced by the
management control of sales force to a great extent as seen from the mean of 3.80 to 3.50.

3.6 Those who have been with the company for 21 to 30 years think that the extent on influence is to a little extent only, gauging from the mean of 2.33

3.7 Management control of sales force, according to the respondents who have served the company for up to 10 years, influences the use of distributors to
a very great extent (mean of 4.64).

3.8 Those who have been with the company from 11 years to 30 years think that the influence of this factor on the use of distributors is to a great extent as
revealed by the means of 4.25 to 4.50.

3.9 It is implied from the opinions of the respondents who have been with the company for up to 10 years that management control influences to a great
extent the choice of channel of distribution.
 3.10 The respondents who have been employed for 11 to 20 years believe that the influence of this factor is, likewise, to a great extent while those who
have served for 21 to 30 years stated that this factor influences managers’ decision on the choice if channel of distribution to a moderate extent.

Critique: 1. In 3.1 the means reported was in range but you could get the average instead.
2. In 3.3 the means reported was in range but you could get the average instead.
3. In 3.5 the means reported was in range but you could get the average instead.
4. In 3.8 the means reported was in range but you could get the average instead.

Suggestion: 1. Use the average of the means which is supposed to be 3.27.

2. Use the average of the means which is supposed to be 3.08.
3. Use the average of the means which is supposed to be 3.65.
4. Use the average of the means which is supposed to be 4.38.
4 Availability of Financial Resources

4.1 The use of wholesalers, according to the respondents who have been with the company for up to 20 years is influenced by the availability of financial
resources to a moderate extent (means of 3.50 and 3.33, respectively).

4.2 Those who have been employed for 21 to 30 years think that the use of wholesalers is influenced by this factor to a very great extent (mean if 4.67).

4.3 As regards the use of retailers, all the respondents indicated that this is influenced by the availability of financial resources to a moderate extent (means
ranging from 2.67 to 3.33).

4.4 In the use of agents/brokers, the respondents who have been employed for up to 10 years think that this is influenced by the availability of financial
resources to a great extent based on the mean of 3.60.

4.5 The respondents who have been with the company for 11 to 30 years assessed the use of agents/brokers as influenced by the availability of financial
resources to a moderate extent (means of 3.0 and 2.67, in that order).

4.6 The respondents who have served the company for up to 20 years believe that the use of distributors is influenced by the availability of financial
resources to a moderate extents (means of 3.00 to 4.20) while those who have been employed for 21 to 30 years indicated that the use of distributors is
influenced this factor to a great extent (mean of 3.69).

Critique: 1. In 4.1 the means reported was in range but you could get the average instead.
2. In 4.3 the means reported was in range but you could use the average from the table instead.
3. In 4.5 the means reported was in range but you could get the average instead.

Suggestion: 1. Use the average of the means which is supposed to be 3.42.

2. Use the average of the means from the table which is 3.03.
3. Use the average of the means which is supposed to be 2.83
5 Dominance of the Products in the Market
 5.1 The respondents who have served the company for 21 to 20 years perceive that dominance of products in the market influences the use of wholesalers
to a very great extent (mean of 5.00).

5.2 The respondents who have been with the company for up to 20 years think that this factor in the market influences the use of wholesalers to a great
extent (means of 3.8 to 4.00).

5.3 The use of retailers, according to respondents who have served the company for up to 10 years, is influenced to great extent (mean of 4.10) by
dominance of the products in the market.

5.4 Likewise, those who have been in the company for 11 to 20 years claimed that this factor influences the use of retailers to a moderate extent (mean of
3.50).

5.5 However, the respondents who have been employed for 21 to 30 years indicated that the use of retailers is influenced by this factor to a little extent,
gauging from the mean of 2.33.

5.6 The respondents who have been with the company for p to 10 years think that the use of agents/brokers is influenced by the dominance of the products
in the market to a great extent (mean of 4.0)

5.7 Those who have been employed for 11 to 20 years indicated that this factor influences the use of agents/brokers to a moderate extent (mean of 3.00)

5.8 Those who have served the company for 21 to 30 years, indicated also that the dominance of products in the market influences the use of
agents/brokers to a moderate extent (mean of 2.67).

5.9 The respondents who have been employed with the company for up to 10 years revealed that dominance of products in the market influences the use of
agents/brokers to a very great extent (mean of 4.73).

5.10 Those who have served the company for 11 to 20 years indicated that the use of distributorship is influenced by this factor to a great extent (mean of
4.00). Respondents who have served the company for 21 to 30 years, perceive the influence of dominance of products in the market to a great extent
(mean of 4.00).

Critique: 1. In 5.2 the means reported was in range but you could get the average instead.

Suggestion: 1. Use the average of the means which is supposed to be 3.9.

6 Choices of Channel of Distribution

6.1 Ranked first by the three groups of respondents among the choice of channel of distribution are the distributors (average of 4.22).

6.2 Ranked second are the wholesalers (average of 3.98) while third are the agents/brokers (average of 3.24) and the last are the retailers (average 3.05).
Critique: None

Suggestion: Please include the ranking as part of the statistical treatment of data.
III. Significance of difference in the Opinions of the Respondents on the Influence of Market Factors in the Choice of Channel of Distribution Decision
1. As to the influence of availability of product to the market, no significant difference was noted in the opinions of the respondents when grouped according to
length of service as indicated by the F-ratio of 1.422 against the tabular value of 4.26 at .05 level of significance.

2. On the influence of the cost of distribution on the managers’ decision in the choice of channel of distribution, the opinions of the respondents did not vary
significantly as shown by the F-ratio of 0.476 which was lower than the tabular value of 4.26.

3. No significant difference in opinions regarding the influence of management control of the sales force on the managers’ decision in the choice of distribution
is evidenced by the F-ratio of 0.572 which turned out lower than the tabular value of 4.26.

4. Opinions on the influence of availability of financial resources in the choice of channel of distribution, also, did not vary significantly as seen from the F-ratio
of 0.264 which was lower than the acceptance region. The same goes true on the opinions of the respondents pertaining to the influence of dominance of
the products on the managers’ decision in the choice of channel of distribution.

Critique: The F-ratio in #2 is wrong.

Suggestion: Use the correct F-ratio which should be 0.722. Also include which hypothesis should you accept as there were two hypotheses.
IV. Extent of effectiveness of the Channel of Distribution Decision
1. Extent of Effectiveness of the Channel of Distribution on Sales Volume

1.1 All the respondents assessed the channel of distribution as effective in increasing sales as shown by the means of 4.33 to 4.50. Respondents from
Sales and Logistics indicated that the channel of distribution is moderately effective in increasing overall revenues, gauging from the means of 3.18 and
2.67. Those from warehousing rated this effective as indicated by the mean of 4.25.

1.2 The channel of distribution decision is moderately effective in decreasing the sales volume (mean of 3.18), according to the respondents from sales but
is effective (mean of 4.50) based on the opinions of the respondents from warehousing.

1.3 From Logistics, this is effective to a little extent (mean of 1.33) in decreasing the sales volume.

1.4 Respondents from both sales and warehousing assessed the channel of distribution moderately effective in decreasing sales volume as seen from the
means of 3.27 and 3.50.

1.5 Those from logistics indicated that the channel of distribution decision is effective to a little extent in decreasing overall revenues.

Critique: 1. In 1.1 the means reported was in range but you could get the average instead.
2. In 1.4 the means reported was in range but you could get the average instead.
Suggestion: 1. Use the average mean for the increase in sales volume which should be 4.44 while the average mean for the increase in overall revenue as per sale
and logistics should be 2.93.
2. The average mean should be 3.39.

2Extent of effectiveness of the channel of Distribution on competition

2.1 All the respondents indicate that the channel of distribution is effective in putting the company ahead of competitors (means of 4.20 to 4.40).

2.2 According to respondents from sales and logistics, the channel of distribution decision is very effective (means of 4.67 and five, respectively) in making
available more products at shelf.

2.3 The respondents from warehousing, on the other hand indicated that it is effective as shown by the mean of 4.0.

2.4 As regards bringing more investors at outlets, respondents from sales claimed the channel of distribution decision is very effective (mean of 4.67) while
respondents from warehousing revealed it is very effective (means of 5.0) but from logistics, the channel of distribution is moderately effective (mean of
3.4).

2.5 According to respondents from sales and warehousing, the channel of distribution decision is very effective in using distributors (means of 4.55 to 4.67)
while respondents from logistics revealed that it is effective (mean of 4.0).

Critique: 1. In 2.1 the average mean should be used.

2. In 2.5 the average mean for sales and warehousing should be used.

Suggestion: 1. Use the average mean which should be 4.31.

2. Use the average mean which should be 4.61.
3. Extent of effectiveness of the channel of distribution on production Specialization

3.1 Respondents regardless of department affiliation consider the channel of distribution effective (means of 3.75 to 4.33) in bringing more investments that
are channelled in improvement in production specialization. Respondents from sales find the channel of distribution decision very effective (mean of
4.67) but, from warehousing and logistics, effective only (means of 4.0 and 4.33) in encouraging more engagement efforts that are focused at upgrading
existing technology.

3.2 All the respondents, regardless of department affiliation, showed that the channel of distribution decision is effective (means of 4.25 to 4.36) in
encouraging more investments that are diverted to developing new processes.

3.3 According to respondents from sales, the channel of distribution decision is very effective (mean of 4.55) in making resources utilized instead for
developing new product features respondents from warehousing assessed this effective (mean of 4.50) while respondents from logistics found the
channel of distribution decision moderately effective (mean of 3.0) in making resources utilized instead for developing new product features.

Critique: 1. In 3.1 use the average mean for all three departments instead of range.
2. In 3.2 use the average mean instead of range
Suggestion: 1. Use the average mean for the three departments of 4.02 instead of the range.
2. Use the average mean of all three departments of 4.30 instead of the range.
4. On amount of profit

4.1 The respondents from sales and warehousing find the channel of distribution effective (means of 4.0 and 4.20) in reducing sales costs. Respondents
from logistics consider these decision moderately effective (mean of 3.33) in realizing reduction in sales costs.

4.2 The channel of distribution decision, according to respondents from sales and warehousing, are effective (means of 3.92 and 3.85) in reducing
administrative costs but respondents from logistics indicated this moderately effective only (mean of 3.0).

4.3 Channel of distribution decision, according to respondents from sales, is effective in reducing production costs (mean of 3.73) while respondents from
warehousing and logistics find the decision moderately effective (means of 3.5 and 3.33, in that order)

4.4 The respondents from sales and warehousing rated the channel of distribution decision effective in generating overall increase seen from the means of
3.64 and 3.75 while those from logistics assessed these decision only moderately effective (mean of 3.00) in generating overall increase in profit

Critique: Use the average means instead of ratio

Suggestion: 1. In 4.1 use the average mean of 4.10

2. In 4.2 use the average mean of 3.89
3. In 4.3 use the average mean of 3.42
4. In 4.4 use the average mean of 3.70
Significance of Difference in opinions of the Respondents on the effectiveness of the Managers’ decision in the choice of channel distribution when grouped
according to department affiliation
1. The null hypothesis of no significant difference in the opinions of the respondents on the effectiveness of channels of distribution decision on sales volume
when grouped according to department affiliation is accepted gauging from the calculated F-ratio of 3.54 which is lower than the tabular value of 3.68.
3. No significant difference in opinions regarding the effectiveness of the channel of distribution decision on competition when grouped according to
department affiliation as indicated by the F-ratio of 0.536 which is outside of the rejection region.
4. The opinions on the effectiveness of this decision on product specialization do not vary significantly according to the F-ratio 0.782 which turned out lower
that the tabular value of 3.68.
5. Opinions on the effectiveness of channel of distribution decision in improving the amount of profit differ significantly as evidenced by the F-ratio of 11.72
which is higher than the tabular value of 3.68

Critique: None

Suggestion: Present an overall remark which state that based on the results of the survey there is no significant difference in the opinions of the respondents on the
effectiveness of channels of distribution decision when grouped according to department affiliation.
Conclusions
Bases on the findings of this study, the researcher presents the following recommendations:
I. Status of the Distribution System of the Company
 1. The Company has centralized its channel of distribution utilizing only the distributors and very few wholesale orders in the delivery of its products to other
intermediaries. It is the distributor that makes the decision to deal or not with other outlets.

2. The sales department employs a good number of salesmen that coordinate the requirements of distributors who are located all over the country. The
number of employees assigned to the warehousing and Distribution Department is few and are assigned mainly to handle finished product movements in the
warehouse.

3. Forwarders are preferred in transporting finished products o their respective destinations because of the accompanying loading crew that goes along with
the vehicle. Hired vans are good alternatives for delivery to warehouse located in Metro Manila because these are adaptable to existing traffic conditions.
Besides, smaller vehicles are not covered by the truck ban so that movement of goods is not delayed too much.

4. Warehouse are used as transhipment points only for product that have been produced in the plant and are scheduled to be delivered to or picked up by
specific distributors within its jurisdiction. Finished goods do not stay long in these warehouses, because of fast turnover, hence the few number of
warehouses being operated by the company.

Critique: How were the following conclusions derived when it was not presented as part of data?

Suggestion: Please include the source of the conclusions in which in this case is probably from the unstructured interview conducted.
II. Extent to which market factors influence the management decision in the choice of channel of distribution.
1. Availability of products in the market

The distributors exert more influence on the availability of the products in the market. They determine which of the retailers and how often they should be
replenished with the products of the company.
2. Cost of Distribution

The factor of cost of distribution exerts the biggest influence on the managers’ decision in the choice of channel of distribution for the company products.

3. Management Control of sales force

This factor influences the managers’ decision in the choice of channel of distribution to a great extent.
4. Availability of Financial Resources

The managers’ decision on the choice of channel of distribution is influenced by the availability of financial resources only to a moderate extent. Specifically,
the influence is very great on the distributors and wholesalers.
5. Dominance of the product in the market influences the manager’s decision in the choice of channel of distribution, most especially in the use of wholesalers.

6. Choices of channel of distribution

The distributor is the most appropriate channel of distribution that the company could choose. If the channel of distribution were a combination of
intermediaries, the distributors and the wholesalers appear to be the best choice.
Critique: None
Suggestion: Please include the source of the conclusions in which in this case is probably from the unstructured interview conducted.
III. Significance of difference in the opinions of the respondents on the influence of market factors in the choice of channel of distribution decision
It is implied from the data that the use of distributors as the channel of distribution is a unanimous choice.
Critique: None

Suggestion: Although it is implied in the data that the use of distributors is a unanimous choice, the difference of opinion when it comes to the amount profit should
still be included on the conclusion as this may bring other factors that may alter the data. Please include this in the recommendations.
IV. Extent of effectiveness of the channel of distribution decision
1. Extent of effectiveness of the channel of distribution on sales volume

The existing channel of distribution is moderately effective in generating sales volume.

2. Extent of effectiveness of the channel of distribution on Competition

The channel of distribution is effective in dealing with competition.

3. Extent of effectiveness of the channel of distribution on Product specialization

The channel of distribution is effective in bringing about product specialization.

4. On amount profit

The groups of respondents representing sales and warehousing assessed the channel of distribution effective in improving the amount of profit. The group
from logistics rated this moderately effective.

Critique: How did you come up with the conclusions? This was not part of any table presented?

Suggestion: Please include the table with statistical data for us to confirm whether the effect were effective or not.
VI. Significance of difference in opinions of the respondents on the effectiveness of the managers’ decision in the choice of channel of distribution when grouped
according to department affiliation
The managers’ decision on the choice of channel of distribution may not necessarily result in an increase in the amount of profit. The managers’ decision on
the choice of channel of distribution on factors of sales volumes, competition, and on product specialization is unanimously perceived as effective.

Critique: How come the first conclusion is only based on the data in which you rejected the Ho.

Suggestion: Please state it as “The managers’ decision on the choice of channel of distribution may increase the sales volume, gain an advantage to competitors
and create product specialization but it may not necessarily increase the profit”.