The study sought to find out the Impact of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction case study crown beverages ltd. The research was guided by the following objectives,

To assess the benefits of physical distribution efficiency at crown beverages ltd.
To explore factors hindering efficient physical distribution at crown beverages ltd.
To investigate effects of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction at crown beverages ltd.

The purpose of study was to explore the impact of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction.

The research design used in the study was qualitative in nature, the researcher also used sample size of 30 respondents and they were categorized as administrators, accounting officers, stores personnel. During this process and the sample size of the study was selected using purposive sampling method. An interview was used as data collection instrument.

In conclusion study revealed that there is need for crown beverages to strengthen its physical distribution systems in order to realize customer satisfaction effectiveness.

The researcher recommends the administration of crown beverages to develop ICT facilities, increase, increase funding on physical distribution infrastructure, and increase on the commitment of buyers and ask the government to maintain political instability.

Research needs to be carried out on the Impact of technology on procurement fraud, Tools and techniques used to improve procurement effectiveness, Roles of procurement staff on procurement effectiveness.

CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter presented the Background, problem statement, purpose, general objectives, specific objectives, and research questions, Significance of the study and scope of the study.

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Globally physical distribution is of utmost importance, not least because it involves significant amounts of public money even within the context of a national economy; pegnato (2003) estimated the US federal expenditure in physical distribution figure at around $200 billion per annum, while the OECD countries spend more than $trillion dollar in physical infrastructure in order to ensure physical distribution efficiency. Physical distribution efficiency is beneficial to the developing countries and they spend around 15% of their total GDP trying to improve on the system Nicow(2003) .

Physical distribution refers to all the activities that should be done to flow the raw materials and other materials to production place and to make the produced goods available according to the needs of the consumer’s lace and time at reasonable price (Routledgeet al, 2006).

Physical distribution forms part of a broader logistics which ranges from marketing, customer service to the delivery of products (Rabinovichet al 2004).

Physical distribution efficiency involves the process of ensuring the goods required for the manufacture of products and the finished goods from manufacturers are made available within the required time (Sakireet al 2006). The success of physical distribution needs collaborations and high level of information sharing between the distributors and customers, decision synchronization and the alignment of incentives, (Sridharanet al, 2004).

In quality perspective customer satisfaction is defined as a result of comparison between what one customer expects about services provided by a service provider and what customer receives as actual services by a service provider, (Carvanna2003). If services provided by an organization meet customer’s needs, this may lead to high customer satisfaction, (Wakeret al 2006). Satisfaction is a post consumption experience which compares perceived quality with expected quality whereas service quality refers to a global evaluation of a firm’s service delivery system (Fornelleta al 2004). Due to globalization aspects, organizations are competing as demand chains for global customers to meet the customer service levels. Manufacturers and distributors form alliances with shipping and other transportation firms to allow quick exchange of information, decision synchronization and incentive alignment so as to consolidate their competitive strength and provide customer satisfaction in the global markets, (Venus, et al. 2009).

Physical distribution efficiency has been one of crown beverages main competitive strength, this has helped the company increase its market share amidst heavily competitive market comprising of century bottling company (Coca-Cola franchise), Fizzy, Riham cola among many other. physical distribution has enabled crown beverages reach out to market in far and distant places like northern Uganda, eastern Uganda, among many other places served by the beverage giant (cbl records 2012).

Crown beverages is a manufacturing company, manufacturing carbonated soft drinks , like mirinda fruity, mirinda orange, Pepsi, among many others (Cbl, record 2013).

physical distribution efficiency has got numerous benefits to crown beverages, it has also faced numerous challenges which is coupled with poor roads and railway of Uganda (crown beverages records 2011) ,this has not only affected the crown beverages’ efforts to deliver products in time to its customers, but has also affected the company’s overall business performance . This has led to untimely delivery of goods and poor service to the customer, high lead time, slow response to customer needs, highly expensive procurements, emergency expensive procurement, low quality supplies, and limited amount of supplies leading to frequent shortages. Due to these overwhelming mishaps, the researcher therefore intends to investigate into the impact of physical distributions efficiency on customer satisfaction at crown beverages limited.

1.2 Statement of the problem

Physical distribution is one of the important departments of crown beverages, due to its numerous benefits like delivery of goods to the market and timely response to customer demands, among many others. Despite the fact that there is heavy investment by crown beverages in physical distribution, customer dissatisfaction still exists like delay of delivery, slow response to customer needs, increased customer complaints, mismatch between customer needs and supply, in addition there is slow response to customer orders (cbl records 2010). Therefore based upon the above the researcher intends to investigate into the impact of physical distribution efficiency to customer satisfaction at crown beverages, limited located at plot M214 Nakawa, Kampala.

1.3 Purpose of the study

The purpose of the study was to explore the impact of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction at crown beverages ltd.

1.4 Objectives of the study.

To assess the benefits of physical distribution efficiency at crown beverages ltd.
To explore factors hindering efficient physical distribution at crown beverages ltd.

To investigate effects of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction at crown beverages ltd.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

What are the benefits of physical distribution efficiency at crown beverages ltd?
What are the factors hindering efficient physical distributions at crown beverages ltd.

What are the effects of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction at crown beverages ltd?

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

1.5.0 Content scope

The study included, the impact of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction, different ways of improving customer satisfaction, different ways of distribution at crown beverages ltd.

1.5. 1 Time scope

The researcher carried out all this study from February to August 2014.

The study considered data from 2008 to 2014 from crown beverages, this is because a number of products have been introduced and therefore the physical distribution of crown beverages have been a little more strained than the previous years before. Apart from that, the years of 2008- 2014 have seen crown beverages grow more than the previous years (cbl records 2011).

1.5.2 Geographical scope

The study was carried out in crown beverages ltd located at plot M214 Nakawa, Kampala.

1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The study will help manufacturing firms in making informed decisions on how to satisfy customers in order to gain competitive advantage to beat the competition in the business.

The study will help the government in decision making on how much attention to give to physical distribution in order to improve service delivery in the country.

It will help future researchers with knowledge on how physical distribution helps to create customer satisfaction.

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

INTRODUCTION

This chapter presented reviews of existing literature on the impact of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction, benefits of physical distribution efficiency, factors hindering physical distribution efficiency, and effects of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction.

Benefits of physical distribution efficiency.

The system of physical distribution is of an instrumental benefit to the daily performance of an organization, this system has been practiced for many years and by many organizations in the current recent times it is a key factor in achieving customer satisfaction. Organizations with efficient distribution stand out to be the market leaders in the recent times many organizations like Toyota, Nissan and Honda have managed to stream line their distribution systems so s to create a strong and competitive organization so that it can stand out to be a market leader, by the mid 1990s Japanese companies had streamlined their distribution systems that it has been able to unlock the dominance of the western companies in the automobile sector,(Baily et al 2004).

Promotes just in time (JIT), just in time is defined as production based on demand, though this systems is still not widely used in most companies across the globe due to its need for an efficient technology however its used in most developed markets so that such companies are able to meet the timely demands of their customers. Physical distribution efficiency is concerned with timely and reliable flow of goods from the receipt of an order until the goods are made available to the customer, Retailers and suppliers tap on global opportunities through vendor managed inventory and Just in Time inventory techniques by employing the drop-shipping strategy by the end physical distribution service providers to allow timely and reliable delivery of products to buyers, (Rabinovich, et al. 2008). However, companies to be able to realize just in time technique benefits must be able to have an efficient distribution systems apart from that companies in the western world have used this systems in the present times and have managed to enjoy reduced costs in their supply chain and also maximization of their profits (Zineldin et al, 2006).

Just in time has benefits like reduced coast of holding inventory, increased profitability of the organization, (Lysons, 2006), however despite of the above benefits of just in time it also has some weakness, which includes, its expensive to implement this type of system and as such it tends to increase on the final cost of the items in supply, this system may also be difficult to implement especially in low developed countries as it requires a well developed infrastructural sector, ( Farrington et al, 2006).

From the above discussion therefore it’s evident that physical distribution efficiency helps in the promotion of just in time in an organization supply chain which ultimately reduces on an organization costs in purchases, (Ohairwe, 2008).

Proper infrastructural development in some parts of the world and also increased buyer supplier development is also being implemented in some parts of the world in order to ensure that there is efficiency in the supply chain, (Ntayi, 2009). Basing on the above physical distribution efficiency is very important for an organization to realize the benefits of just in time in order to eliminate mismatch between supply and demand, (Ntayi, 2009). The elimination of the bull whip effect that creates uncertainties in production and distribution in the demand chain given its effect on demand forecasting, order batching, and rationing inventory, allows demand chains to create reliable and timely physical distribution systems, (Zhenxin, et al. 2001). It is observed that, among the means to reduce delivery costs, is through application of automation alternatives that are supported by communication technologies like the EDI and EPOS, but to achieve such a sophisticated technique in an organization setting the infrastructure must be in place, (Gunasekarana, et al. 2004).

High degree of operational performance, An efficient distribution system can lead to the high levels of operational performance for manufacturers in terms of; faster delivery times, reduced transaction costs, greater profitability, and enhanced inventory turnover this has mainly been observed from several of companies like Shell and Total who pay much respect to physical distribution as the most important way of, (Muylle et al 2006). Efficiency in distribution system will automatically increase quality, variety, customer service, speed and responsiveness in supply chain (Ntayi, et al. 2009).Physical distribution efficiency creates Collaborative planning, forecasting and replenishment (CPFR) between manufacturers and distributors can lead to high level of operational performance in organizational performance which among many things leads to customer satisfaction. Through integration of logistical activities with the aid of communication technologies and top management support, overall performance of the demand chain can be achieved due to physical distribution efficiency, (Bailey, 2004;). However, effective physical distribution efficiency ability to create high operational performance depends on the level of trust, commitment and the quality of information shared in the demand chain, (Danese, 2007).

Inventory control, Physical distribution efficiency helps in minimizing the bull whip effect whose implications include: excess costs, excess inventories, slow response and lost profit, to increase the customer satisfaction, and also helps to gain competitive advantage over their rivals. Apart from that coordination between the ware house of the buyer and seller can easily plan due certainty in delivery of both manufactured and raw materials, (Gunasekarana, et al. 2004). Most organizations use inventory control techniques like vendor managed inventory, this technique helps in eliminating the mismatch between supply and demand and such this the most favored technique currently used in the control of inventory, (Lyson, 2003). Most organization are ensuring that there is proper buyer supplier relationship in order to ensure that there is effective physical distribution system and customer satisfaction in an organization the benefits of inventory control includes: It prevents wastage, increases on the organizational level of satisfying customers needs and also increases on the level of competitiveness of an organization against its competitors, (lysons 2003).

Inventory control also has got some disadvantages which include; this technique may cause shortage of essential commodities in the market in the short run, apart from that it may cause inflation to an economy.Despite the challenges above inventory control demerits may be avoided by ensuring continuity in supply of the essential commodities to the market, (sandberg, 2007).

Physical distribution efficiency is very beneficial if an organization is to control the level of inventory in the market as this will help in the price stability and also in the maintenance of volatility in the commodity prices in the market, (farringtonn et al, 2006).

Planning is possible; According to (Terraryet al, 2003) planning makes one orderly and focused on the purpose. It also points out the need for future change, provides answers for it Questions, is a control tool, compels visualization of entirely and assists the manager in gaining status and increases balance utilizing resources. Cole (1997) argues that planning can lead to improved efficiency and effectiveness in delivery of services and goods. Physical distribution efficiency helps organizations to be certain of the delivery of goods and therefore plan accordingly; this will therefore prevent them from unnecessary costs. (Sandberg, 2007).

In the modern business economy, planning for the organization is managerial task which perhaps do not consider so much the level of distribution efficiency, but still physical distribution efficiency plays a pivotal role in the planning for the organizational development, ( Desler, 2008).Planning for an organization may have the following benefits, it helps the organization in the minization of risks and also to discover the causes of costs and perhaps help in the elimination of the above costs. Planning in an organization despite its numerous benefits it also posse some weakness in that organization managerial and technical team tend to waste a lot of time planning hence this wastes a lot of organizational resources, (Prasad, 2005).

Trust and commitment is increased, Trust is something that no money and resource can buy therefore it’s a source of competitive advantage available to any party willing to Adopt the appropriate mindset. Trust being largely invincible is often overlooked if buyers and suppliers are to create a good business relation and therefore an efficient delivery system is one of the indisputable ways of improving trust and buyers’ commitment towards the seller,(Dow 2002). Physical distribution efficiency increases trust between suppliers and buyers according to (Janjaap et al 2005), physical distribution creates certainty of availability of goods therefore buyers are sure of getting goods in the market as they going to the market; this will create a sense of optimism in them and raise their trust for the buyers.

Most organization have viewed trust as system that can improved by enforcing the t system of buyer supplier development which is defined as any activity that a buyer undertakes to improve a suppliers performance or capability to meet the buyers short term or long term needs.( mattsonet al,2009).Trust is very important in an organization so that it’s able to improve the confidence between the buyers and supplier in business dealing, but perhaps over trusting of a business partner may lead shortage in business as trust encourages dependence on he business partner, (Aswathappa., 2008). Despite the weaknesses of physical distribution in enforcing the level of trust among different organizations, its still regarded as he best tool in the implementation of the level of trust in the organization, ( Lysons, 2006).

Customer service quality which is the main goal of most manufacturing companies across the globe are able to stand out of the competition in the manufacturing for example in the soft drinks markets customers service quality has mainly been associated with timely meeting of the markets industry but this has been realized by most companies who have created and well structured physical distribution system. Physical distribution efficiency improves service quality by creating reliability, timeliness, availability of the products. This will therefore save customers time and also satisfies customers accordingly most of the new generation companies especially in the logistics systems they have used physical distribution efficiency as the strength to be able to maximize on their customers base this is due to the fact they are able to meet customers’ orders in time and be able to stand out of the competitive industry so that they are able to maximize profits,(Sambasivan, et al. 2009). Service quality is expected to lead to customer satisfaction in all types of service industries like logistics and also in the manufacturing organizations (parasuraman et al 2000). Due to globalization aspects, organizations are competing as demand chains for global customers to meet the customer service levels. Manufacturers and distributors form alliances with shipping and other transportation firms (Venus, et al. 2009) to allow quick exchange of information, decision synchronization and incentive alignment so as to consolidate their competitive strength in the global markets, (Simatupang, 2004, ). Customer service quality has been is very important in the survival of a business since there can make or break a business depending on the way they are served in an organization, (Soonhong. et al, 2005).

Most business firms across the globe need first and timely delivery of information so that they are able to make strategic decisions and also to be able to deliver required message to the customers and above all Information sharing has become a life blood of the different organization so in globalized world information is very necessary so that the company is able to make strategic decisions but for such as systems to be made a reality physical distribution efficiency is a requirement , physical distribution efficiency It requires optimization of logistics elements; production planning and demand forecasting, information management, routing and tracking, transportation, order processing, material control and warehousing (Aguezzoul, 2007).With the aid of communication technologies to allow efficient sharing of information, decision synchronization and incentive alignment, to achieve improvement in the customer service levels, (Sridharan et al, 2005).

Physical distribution efficiency is entirely very beneficial to an organization, in order to achieve numerous benefits like planning efficiency, increase in the level of trust, customer service quality, high degree of operational performance, and customer service quality.(Venus, et al. 2009).

2.3. FACTORS HINDERING EFFICIENT PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION.

There are many factors that tend to hinder efficient physical distribution in organizations as stated by different scholars and some of them include;

Under developed information and communication technology facilities, Information and communication technology plays important role in physical distribution like track and tracing, networking between buyers and sellers, enabling faster and easy communication, increasing the level of co-operation between organizations, thought this numerous merits of physical distribution however information and communication facilities is necessary for an organization to be able to enjoy the benefits of physical distribution efficiency , in the developed world companies like Toyota due to developed information and communication systems in place the company is able to enjoy the benefits of physical distribution efficiency. ICT comprises a number of technologies, which may, but need not be internet-based. In a distribution setting, distinguish between transaction systems, operational planning systems, and control Journal of Emerging Trends in Economics and Management Sciences (JETEMS) systems. These may be computer mediated (extranets, intranets) or based on internet or web technology Transaction system, ICT systems like Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) is the electronic transfer of structured data by agreed message standards from one computer application, with a minimum of human intervention, connecting all parties in a distribution channels, interactive telephone systems, and ecommerce, e.g. business-to-business (B2B) e-marketplaces, for the global procurement of inputs; contracting, (Wit et al,2006). Currently most companies are investing heavily on information and communication technologies in order to ensure that the system of physical distribution efficiency is a success in their respective organizations, according to the global statistics, companies like Toyota spend billion improving their physical distribution systems, ( Handfield et al, 2006).Physical distribution efficiency therefore is a system that needs information and communication technology, facilityin order to be applicable in most organizations setting; this has also seen numerous investments in this sector, (Jonsson, 2000).

Physical distribution management is the process of managing the efficient, costs effective way of transporting goods, supplies and related information from the point of origin to the point of consumption, The introduction of communication and information technology has brought in tremendous improvements in the flow of materials from the point of origin to the point of consumption including reduced arrangement costs and handling times, shortened response time for purchasing, improved order process speed and reduced labourcosts. The business environment today has been undergoing unprecedented change and many companies are seeking new ways to stand out from the competition by sustaining their competitive advantage. In today’s highly competitive global market place, the pressure is on organizations to find new ways of creating and delivering value to customers, development of ICT systems is necessary for the success of physical distribution in a country. (Lysons, 2006).The physical distribution efficiency has had numerous challenges

In accessibility of some parts of the world, physical distribution which is normally done through roads, railways, air transport and water among others, (Somuyiet al 2006).Countries which are easily accessible with efficient transport system in place like roads, railways, and air transport, distribution of goods to different parts of the country is made simple and creates efficiency in physical distribution (Dhl annual report 2011).In the modern world inaccessible places has given rise to Internet retailer relationships with suppliers tap on global opportunities through vendor managed inventory and Just in Time inventory techniques by employing the drop-shipping strategy by the end physical distribution service providers to allow timely and reliable delivery of products to online buyers, acting as a principle solution to in accessibility of the place, (Rabinovich, et al. 2008). The accessibility of an area is very essential if an organization is to achieve physical distribution efficiency in any attempt, (Ntayi et al, 2009).

Today’s physical distribution has become more complex as companies find it extremely hard to maintain their competitive advantage purely on the basis of innovative strategies relating to the product, price, place or promotion. Since this competitive advantage can easily be initiated, the emphasis now is on building a sustainable competitive advantage through distribution as a means to successfully differentiate oneself from competitors and accessibility of the area is crucial for the success of physical distribution. (Ntayiet al 2006).

Limited funds by some organizations, hinders physical distribution efficiency. Logistics organizations like DHL spend millions of dollars to upgrade their distribution systems in order to deliver customer orders in a first and quick way so as to maintain the trust of customers. Most countries in the African continent, Latin America and parts of south Asia have limited income to be able to finance some of the systems to be able to upgrade their physical distribution systems, most of these countries are faced with a problem of limited funds to be able to upgrade their distribution this therefore makes trade in such countries expensive and also this makes such countries to be shunned by investors due to the heavy costs of doing business, (Fraser et al, 2012).

Limited collaboration between suppliers and buyers, Collaboration between buyers and suppliers is crucial among many reasons for the efficiency of physical distribution, this helps in ensuring information flow which is vital in the supply chain in such a situation members in both organization network, but in a case where there is low level of collaboration between buyers and sellers physical distribution efficiency may not be achieved (ntayi et al 2007). Minimal collaboration among members in the demand chain, downstream because of the distribution barriers has not been successfully tackled; those related to communication technologies and human beings (sandberg, 2007). The impact of internet technology on the relationship between vertical collaboration and physical distribution service quality points to the importance of the communication technologies in facilitating information exchange in collaborations, asserting that; reliability, timeliness and availability of products, can be achieved through integration of logistical activities using web-enabled communication technologies. Internet resolves traditional supply chain integration tradeoffs and allows all the members to exchange information on order placement and processing efficiently, (Sambasivan, et al. 2009).

Collaboration between members’of the supply chain is very necessary if an organization is to achieve success in physical distribution in order to achieve competitive advantage over their competitors, (Lysons, 2003).Vertical collaboration is made easy with efficient physical distribution systems, and collaboration among member of the supply chain is necessary if the organizations are to realize the benefits of physical distribution as this will increase better demand forecast, planning, inventory visibility reduced inventory and cost saving and increased responsiveness , this requires information sharing through EPOS data, Promotion of technological upgrading is critical in order to encourage manufacturing companies to capture more value added from participation in collaboration in the supply chain. Policy in this area should aim to support training and capacity building via skill development programmes; promote partnerships between manufacturing companies and organizations overseas that can develop or transfer technology, products, processes or management practices; and to facilitate the technological upgrading through various financial schemes, such as credit lines for upgrading is critical as it facilitates collaboration between companies enables companies to be efficient in their distribution programs, (Soonhong et al 2005). Demand chain vertical collaboration require communication technologies, EDI, Bar Coding, ERP, RFID, in their information structures to allow a seamless flow of information ,exchange among the members to build stronger collaboration relations (Chwen et al 2006).

Limited commitment, This is the degree of how a party is determined to achieve a certain commitment in a partnership so that to be able to realize the benefits members of a collaboration in organization , therefore for an organization to be in position to achieve the benefits of physical distribution commitment between both parties is necessary as this tends to hinder the existence of efficient physical distribution systems in an organization, must demonstrate willingness to commit to a given relationship through specific investment of resources to agree upon distribution activities or projects in the demand chain for a successful collaboration, (chwenet al 2006).Commitment between buyers and sellers is a necessity in business so that buyers and sellers are sure that the other partners will perform a certain given responsibility as agreed upon and will respect the terms and conditions of the contract (Jonsson et al 2006).According to Nakatani, (2003), commitment is a relative concept that grows following the development of collaboration between parties in the demand chain, thus a premise needed for the establishment of collaborative relationships. Simatupang, (2002) on the other hand agree that commitment is the most essential feature for the success of any collaboration in the demand chain.

Katrina, (2003) on the other hand reveals that commitment is an essential characteristic that separates collaboration from preceding relationships in supply chains. For example, there is greater commitment in collaboration to allow companies share a vision and employ sophisticated processes such as joint planning and operation in the service of that vision. Parties are able to develop demand chain collaborations if they invest a great deal of resources, cultivate trust and commitment, and share long-term strategic goals. A high degree of web-based demand chain integration can lead to the high levels of operational performance which will ultimately result into high levels of commitment among members of the supply chain, for manufacturers in terms of; faster delivery times, reduced transaction costs, greater profitability, and enhanced inventory turnover, (Vereerckeet al, 2006). Increased quality, variety, customer service, speed and responsiveness, as some of the benefits accruing to demand chains as a result of integration of logistical activities in the demand chain with the help of communication technologies and increased commitment among members of the supply chain, Brynjolfsson, (2004). Commitment in the supply chain is very necessary as members are sure of the continuity of the business operations in the supply chain and therefore are willing to give the collaboration any thing they can so that they achieve its success, (Zhenxin, et al. 2001). At an operational level, implementation of vertical collaboration in the demand chain calls for commitment through driving change on; shifting roles on who handles which activity, building personal relations to allow quicker information sharing, manager and worker buy-in and commitment, throughout the entire demand chain to achieve any improvements in the relationships, (Vereercke, 2006). From the discussion, the following is therefore clear that Commitment predicts the successfulness of the collaborations between the manufacturers and distributors in the demand chain which will ultimately determine the success of physical distribution efficiency, (Lysons, 2003).

Political instability, in some parts of the world hinders the success of distribution efficiency in such areas. Carrying out business in politically unstable areas is highly risky and business organizations stand out to loose huge sum of money if they invest in such areas. politics of a country is a key determinant of the performance of a business when the country is in political turmoil the business operations tends to reduce this therefore reduces on the level of investors confidence in investigating investing in physical distribution systems of a given country, (World Bank report 2010).Most companies are working hard to eliminate the impacts of political instability from affecting their business operations. From the above discussion it’s generally clear that political instability tend to hinder physical distribution efficiency in a global setting and in business generally, (Desler, 2006).

Physical distribution can be successful if an organization addresses most of the issues like, commitment, collaboration, and up grading of information and communication systems, (Sambasivan, et al. (2009).

2.4. Effects of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction.

Physical distribution is a set of activities concerned with the efficient and safe movement of goods from the end of the production line to the consumers. Meeting customer needs, is the component of customer service, companies must recognize if what level of customer service should be provided and at the same time, intended. A buyer always needs the customer service that meets his/ her satisfaction. There are instances when the buyers demand for something that is a little too hard for the company to meet, or the company is not willing to give the service due to its high-price shipping. So, in the beginning of the dealing, the company must first know whether it can meet up that standard from a customer or not and, by the time that the company determines that it will not hit a costly delivery, then it could already proceed. (forster 2004). Most organization ensure that they meet the demands of the market at all costs in order to ensure that there is efficiency and competitiveness of the business operation in an organization both form the setting of external environment and of the out domestic market, this will also ensure that there is limited communication barriers among companies, There is minimal collaboration among members in the demand chain downstream because of the barriers of logistical collaborations that have not been successfully tackled; those related to communication technologies and human beings, (Sandberg. 2007).From the above discussion therefore physical distribution efficiency leads to the achievement of customer satisfaction, (Sandberg. 2007)

Reduction of transportation costs, another important component of physical distribution that companies, whether big or small is the transportation. This part of the process may determine the probable cost that the company needs to provide to ship the goods. More or less, the shipping is not included in the fees that most of the companies present to the customers, or sometimes, shipment is already included in the prices presented. Depending on the kind of products does a company ship, it should choose among the many choices. Air freight may be fast and it provides safety especially to products which are fragile, but it is costly. Trucks deliver goods fast, but only by land. Water carriers may be economical but they are slow. Other choices of transportation of Vertical collaboration are an effort by two or more organizations to achieve results that they cannot achieve by working in isolation, (Archer, 2007). Sandberg (2007)introduces interdependence, between by creating efficiency of transport costs in order to eliminate unnecessary expenses in the transportation of goods (Oliver et al 2002).From the above discussion therefore physical distribution efficiency leads to the reduction of transport costs, and the general business expenses, Chwen, et al. (2006)

Proper storage of products, Warehousing or storage of goods should also be paid attention. There are products that are easily broken or run out over time, there are also products that demands a level of temperature in order for it to last long and do not end up useful. There are products that don’t need any of these kinds of treatment because they can go long-term. However, companies must consider that warehousing must always keep their products safe and still efficient for use until they meet their buyers. They should still consider whether they go for public warehousing, which makes them save more rather than going for a private warehouse and be able to meet short term and long run needs of customers. (zeithaml et el, 2003), Efficiency in physical distribution has in the recent times been important in the proper storage of goods for future some times for the elimination of the bullwhip effect and in other time to prevent deflation in the market, (Wee, 2003).Despite of the above benefit of storage in some organization has brought about increment in costs of the organizations expenditure due tom the numerous storage expenses in ware houses, (Farrington et al, 2006).From the above discussion physical distribution helps to eliminate transportation costs, and also improve on the general competitiveness of the performance of the organizations, (Lysons, 2006).

Efficiency in Order processing, This is a way in which the business owner often does credit check, sale recording, making the appropriate accounting entries order, and keeping track of the item, shipping, and regulation of inventory records. With the innovation available in the industry today, it will be much easier for the companies to do the order processing. They can use Bar Code System, Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), and other technological innovations to help them in order processing. (Parasuraman et al 2002), Integrating the demand chain through vertical collaboration to reduce costs and to improve service levels is facilitated by the adoption of developments in information communication technology (ICT), (Mason, et al. 2007). The involved parties share information, synchronize decision making and align incentives (Sridharan et al, 2005) with the help of communication technologies such as Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), Electronic Point of Sale (EPOS), Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) to facilitate a smooth flow of information exchange necessary for improved collaborations in the demand chain, (McLaren, et al 2002).However order processing efficiency may require an organization to invest heavily in the technological development of its operations which may sound a little expensive for the new stating business this perhaps may be solved by an organization concentrating on tit s core needs in a given period of time, to achieve efficiency in its operation, (Zhenx. et‟ al, 2001).

Form the above discussion therefore its evident that the modern system of order processingis achievable once an organization has an efficient physical distribution system in place, (Mason, et al. 2007).

Proper handling of perishable and fragile products, finally, protective packaging and material handling play a great role in physical distribution too. This component includes all of the handling from having the finished product from the manufacturer to storing it to the warehouse and shipping the product by any means of transportation. All the products are assets of the company to customer satisfaction, that once a product is delivered to the buyer’s doorstep, nothing is altered from the product from the moment it was materialized. Thus, safety packaging and handling the products carefully, most especially to fragile products, is a must or else, some loss may occur both from the buyer, especially to the business owner or the company. ( Carvan Et Al 2002).Whenthere is efficient distribution system among members in the demand chain downstream because of the barriers of logistical collaborations that have not been successfully tackled; those related to communication technologies and human beings, (Sandberg. 2007).

From the above discussion is evident that physical distribution is beneficial for an organization to be able to achieve proper handling of the, fragile items and also the perishable goods, (Lyons et al, 2006).

From the above study therefore it’s evident that physical distribution efficiency is of great value to the customers by mostly reducing on the transport costs, ensuring efficiency in order processing , increasing on the general performance of the business and Meeting customer needs, this therefore ensures the efficiency in organizational performance, (Norm, 2007).

2.5 In conclusions.

The study shows that physical distribution has existed for many years and many organizations are using it however in the modern times advancement in communication technology is necessary for the efficiency of physical distribution efficiency to create customer satisfaction in an organization.

The study further shows that customer satisfaction is necessary for an organization to stay competitive in the modern business environment apart from that it also shows that physical distribution efficiency is necessary

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction

This chapter presented the methodology which consisted of the research design, area of study, study population, sample population and selection, sampling technique, data collection method, data quality control, data collection procedures and limitations of the study.

3.1 Research design

The study used descriptive research design. The researcher employed descriptive research design since it provides the opinion of people about the subject knowledge on the impact of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction. The design availed the researcher with comprehensive information about the research study as a way of getting solutions. Descriptive approach, in this case was used because the study sought descriptive analysis of information.

3.2 Area of the study

The area of study was Crown beverages limited, it’s a soft drinks manufactures that, produces soft drinks like Pepsi, Mirinda orange, Mirindaorange, and mountain dew among others, located at plot M214 Nakawa Kampala, Uganda.,

3.2 Study population and sample size

The study targeted crown beverages administrators, the procurement staffs of crown beverages, accounting officers of the organization, accounts, and stores, and distributors.

3.3 Sampling techniques

According to (Amin, 2005) sampling involves selecting a sample of the population in such a way that samples of the same size has equal chances of being selected.

The sample comprised of 30 respondents that were selected in a way that 3 respondents were from the procurement department, 10 from administration, 10 from accounts and 4 respondents who are stores, 3 Distributors. While carrying out research, purposive sampling was applied to the above different categories of respondents.

3.4 Data sources

Source of data was from both primary and secondary sources.

Primary data

Primary data was obtained from the questionnaires administered on the target respondents to gain opinions and practices on the impacts of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction.

Secondary sources

Secondary data is data which has been collected by individuals or agencies for purposes other than those of a particular research study. It is data developed for some purpose other than for helping to solve the research problem at hand (Bell, 1997). This comprised of literature related to impacts of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction in relation to the case study. Secondary data was sourced because it yields more accurate information than obtained through primary data, and it is also cheaper

3.5 Data Collection Instruments

The major instruments for data collection were questionnaires and interview guide. Surveys were just one part of a complete data collection and evaluation strategy. The major methods of data collection for the study were the survey, which will be done using selected instruments like questionnaires. The questionnaire provided respondents with ample time to comprehend the questions raised and hence, they were able to answer factually.

3.5.1 Questionnaires

The questionnaires were used to collect quantitative data. The researcher administered the questionnaires to respondents in different departments including, procurement, administration, and accounting. Pre-qualified service providers, and suppliers, which will be designed basing on study objectives and questions. Respondents read and write the questionnaires themselves. The questionnaires were close ended and were considered convenient because they were administered to the literate and its anonymous nature fetched unhindered responses.

3.5.2 Interviews

Qualitative data were collected from the informants using interviews. The interview guides were structured. The interviews were held with administration and suppliers, and took approximately thirty to sixty minutes. This was used since it’s the best tool for getting first-hand information /views, perceptions, feelings and attitudes of respondents. Both formal and informal interviews were be used to get maximum information from the different respondents to participate in the research.

3.6 Data collection procedures

Upon receiving the University permission to carry out research, the area of study was visited for purposes of familiarization. The researcher sought permission from staff and once allowed to proceed with research, questionnaires were issued and interviews were carried out with the selected staff.

3.7 Quality control of data instruments

The instrument was taken to the supervisor to check its correctness there after pilot study was carried out to find out if it measures what it is meant to for.

3.8 Data processing and analysis

The raw data was coded, edited, and arranged ready for analyzing only completed raw data was analyzed using statistical tables and graphs.

3.9 Limitations of the study

Financial constraint, cash flow didn’t flow as expected but this did not affect the study. Respondents delayed in filling the questionnaire and fear to give information, but were persuaded that the information will be kept secret.

CHAPTER FOUR

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION

OF FINDINGS

4.0 Introduction

This chapter presented the results in reference to objectives in chapter one. Gender of respondents, Age of respondents, education level of respondents, benefits of physical distribution efficiency, factors hindering efficient physical distribution, and effects of physical distribution.

4.1 FINDINGS ON GENERAL INFORMATION

Table 4.1: shows the findings on the gender of the respondents

GENDER	FREQUENCY	Percentage	Degrees
MALE	19	63.33	228
FEMALE	11	36.67	132
TOTAL	30	100	360

Source: primary data

Table 4.1 above shows that 63.33% of respondents were male and 36.67% were female. That means that the biggest percentage of respondents and employees in the organization were male and apart from that it also shows that male gender dominate the work force of crown beverages.

PIE CHART SHOWING THE GENDER OF RESPONDENTS

4.2 FINDINGS ON THE AGE OF RESPONDENTS.

Table 4.2: Shows findings on age of the respondents

AGE	FREQUENCY	PERCENTAGE
18-29	09	30
30-39	11	36.67
40 and above	10	33.33
TOTAL	30	100

Source: primary data

The table above shows that 30% of the respondents are in the ages of 18-29 while 36.67% of the respondents are in the ages of 30-39 while the remaining respondents are in the ages of above 40 years.

Bar graph showing the age of respondents

The bar graph above shows that majority of the respondents were in the ages of 30-39, this therefore shows that majority of the respondents are mature and therefore were able to give accurate information.

Table 4.3: shows findings on education level of respondents

EDUCATION LEVEL	FREQUENCY	PERCENTAGE
Masters	08	26.67
Degree	15	50
diploma	06	20
Others	01	3.33
TOTAL	30	100

Source: primary data

Table above shows that the majority of staff is degree holders and their percentage is 50%, masters 26.67%, while 20% of the respondents are diploma holders and the rest of the respondents have other qualification.

The line graph showing education level of respondents

The line graph above shows that majority of the respondents were degree holders, this showed that majority of the respondents were highly educated and therefore easily answered the questionnaires without difficulty, it further showed that seconds largest percentage of respondents have masters degree.

FINDINGS NUMBER OF YEARS OF WORKING

Table 4.4 showing the number of years respondents have worked at crown beverages.

Number of years	Frequency	Percentage
Less than two years	05	16.67
3-5 years	06	20
6-10 years	15	50
Above 10 years	04	13.33
Total	30	100

The table shows that majority of the respondents have worked for the time period of 6-10 years, and their percentage stands at 50% of, 20% of the respondents have worked for 3-5 years, while 16.67% of the respondents have worked for and respondents who have worked for above 10 years have percentage of 13.33%.

The above graph showing the number of years respondents have worked at crown beverages

The graph shows that marjority of the respondents have worked for a period of 6-10 years at crown bevergaes this therefore shows that marjority of the respondents have good understanding of the operations of crown beverages and therefore gave right answers to the questions asked by the interviewer.

4.2 BENEFITS OF PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION EFFICIENCY.

TABLE 4.5: SHOWS THE BENEFITS OF PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION EFFICIENCY.

Benefits of physical distribution efficiency	Response
Benefits of physical distribution efficiency	No. and %age	SA	A	N	D	SD	Total
Promotes just in time	No.	15	10	5	0	0	30
Promotes just in time	%age	50	33.33	16.67	0	0	100
High degree of operational efficiency	No.	18	12	0	0	0	30
High degree of operational efficiency	%age	60	40	0	0	0	100
Inventory control	No.	22	5	1	3	0	30
Inventory control	%age	73.33	16.67	3.33	10	0	100
Planning is possible	No.	25	5	0	0	0	30
Planning is possible	%age	83.33	16.67	0	0	0	100
Trust and commitment	No.	18	6	6		0	30
Trust and commitment	%age	60	20	20	0	0	100
Customer service	No	15	15	0	0	0	30
Customer service	%age	50	50	0	0	0	100

From table 4.6 above, findings revealed that, 50% of respondents strongly agreed that physical distribution efficiency promotes just in, 33.33% agreed while 16.67% were Neutral this therefore shows that majority of respondents agree that physical distribution efficiency promotes just in time.

According to the table 60% of the respondents strongly agreed that physical distribution efficiency creates high degree of operational efficiency in an organization, while the remaining 40% agreed this therefore shows that all the respondents agree with the fact that physical distribution efficiency creates operational efficiency.

According to the table above, 73.33 % of the respondents strongly agreed that inventory is efficiently controlled by organizational creation of physical distribution efficiency, while 16.7% agreed, 3.3% of the respondents were not sure while the remaining 10% disagreed basing on this response it is therefore clear that physical distribution efficiency helps in inventory control in an organization.

From the table 83.33% of respondents strongly agreed that physical distribution efficiency is essential for in helping an organization at crown beverages ltd while the remaining percentage of 16.67% of the respondents agreed this makes it clear that physical distribution efficiency is essential in helping an organization plan for their out put.

The table above indicates that 60% of respondents strongly agreed that physical distribution efficiency enables an organization to earn trust and commitment. 20% agreed while the remaining 20% were neutral over the issue. Due to big percentage of 80 percent in favor this therefore shows that physical distribution efficiency enables an organization to earn trust and commitment.

The above table also shows that 50% of the respondents strongly agreed that physical distribution efficiency creates customer service quality to an organization while the remaining 50% agreed this therefore shows that 100% of the respondents agreed that physical distribution efficiency helps an organization to ensure customer service quality.

4.3. FACTORS HINDERING PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION EFFICIENCY.

TABLE 4.6: SHOWS VARIOUS FACTORS HINDERING PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION EFFICIENCY

Various factors hindering physical distribution efficiency	Response
Various factors hindering physical distribution efficiency	No. and %age	SA	A	N	D	SD	Total
Under development of ICT facilities	No	18	12	0	0	0	30
Under development of ICT facilities	%age	60	40	0	0	0	100
Limited funds	No	22	8	0	0	0	30
Limited funds	%age	73.33	26.67	0	0	0	100
Limited collaboration between buyers and sellers	No	15	15	0	0	0	30
Limited collaboration between buyers and sellers	%age	50	50	0	0	0	100
Limited commitment	No	17	10	2	1	0	30
Limited commitment	%age	56.67	33.33	6.67	0	0	100
1. Political instability	No	23	7	0	0	0	30
	%age	76.67	23.33	0	0	0	100

From table above, 60% of the respondents strongly agreed that underdeveloped ICT facilities hinder physical distribution efficiency in an organization while the remaining 40% agreed; this therefore shows that the majority of the respondents agreed that underdeveloped ICT facilities hinder physical distribution efficiency.

According to table above it indicates that, 73.33 % of the respondents strongly agreed that limited funds hinders physical distribution efficiency in an organization , while 26.67% agreed , while non of the respondents, was neutral, disagreed, and strongly disagreed, this findings also shows that indeed limited funds hinders physical distribution efficiency.

Findings revealed in table above, shows that 50% of the respondents strongly agreed and the remaining percentage this therefore shows that 100% of the respondents agree with the fact that limited collaboration between buyers and sellers hinders physical distribution efficiency.

According to the table 56.67% of the respondents strongly agreed that limited commitment hinders physical distribution in an organization, while the remaining 33.33% of the respondents strongly agreed, while non of the respondents was neutral, disagreed or strongly disagreed, this therefore clearly shows that limited commitment hinders physical distribution efficiency to an organization.

From table above, majority of the respondents strongly agreed that political instability hinders physical distribution efficiency while 23.33% agreed while none of the respondents were neutral, disagreed or strongly disagreed.

4.4 EFFECTS OF PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION EFFICIENCY.

TABLE 4.7: Shows the effects of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction.

Effects of physical distribution efficiency	Response
Effects of physical distribution efficiency	No. and %age	SA	A	N	D	SD	Total
Reduction of transport costs	No.	14	10	0	3	3	30
Reduction of transport costs	%age	46.667	33.33%	0	10	10	100
Proper storage of products	No.	15	15	0	0	0	30
Proper storage of products	%age	50	50	0	0	0	100
Efficiency in order processing	No.	14	10	6	0	0	30
Efficiency in order processing	%age	46.67	33.33	20	0	0	100
proper handling of perishable products	No.	15	15	0	0	0	30
proper handling of perishable products	%age	50	50	0	0	0	100
Meeting customer needs	No	20	5	5	0	0	30
	%age	66.67	16.667	16.67	0	0	100

Table above reveals that physical distribution efficiency reduces transport costs this is supported by the strong percentage of 46.67% strongly agreeing, while 33.33% agreed and 10% disagreed while the remaining percentage of respondents strongly disagreed. This therefore shows that if an organization adopts physical distribution efficiency its transports costs will be reduced maximally.

The table indicates that majority of the respondents strongly and agreed that physical distribution efficiency helps in the proper storage of goods while non of the respondents was neutral, disagreed, and strongly disagreed this therefore shows that physical distribution efficiency ensures proper storage of products.

According to table above, 46.67% of the respondents strongly agreed that physical distribution efficiency helps in enabling efficiency in order processing at Crown Beverage Ltd, while 33.33% of the respondents agreed while 20% of the respondents where neutral.

According to the table 66.7% of the respondents strongly agreed that physical distribution efficiency helps in meeting customer’s needs at while 16.67 agreed and the remaining percentage disagreed this therefore shows that physical distribution efficiency is essential towards meeting customer’s needs.

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS, SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATION AND AREAS OF FURTHER STUDY

5.0 Introduction

The study aimed at establishing the impact of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction. The study was guided by research objectives and the researcher summarized the findings in consistence to the research objectives.

5.1 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

5.2.1 THE BENEFITS OF PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION EFFICIENCY.

From table 4.6, findings revealed that, 50% of respondents strongly agreed that physical distribution efficiency promotes just in, 33.33% agreed while 16.67% were Neutral this therefore shows that majority of respondents agree that physical distribution efficiency promotes just in time, this strong response is in line withZineldin et al, (2006) who asserts that companies to be able to realize just in time technique benefits must be able to have an efficient distribution systems apart from that companies in the western world have used this systems in the present times and have managed to enjoy reduced costs in their supply chain and also maximization of their profits.

Findings in table 4.6 also revealed that 60% of the respondents strongly agreed that physical distribution efficiency creates high degree of operational efficiency in an organization, while the remaining 40% agreed this level of positive agreement is also in line with, Ntayi, et al. (2009), asserts that Efficiency in distribution system will automatically increase quality, variety, customer service, speed and responsiveness in supply chain.

The table 4.6 shows that 73.33 % of the respondents strongly agreed that inventory is efficiently controlled by organizational creation of physical distribution efficiency, while 16.7% agreed, 3.3% of the respondents were neutral this strong agreement is also supported by Lyson, (2003), who contends that Most organizations use inventory control techniques like vendor managed inventory, this technique helps in eliminating the mismatch between supply and demand and such this the most favored technique currently used in the control of inventory, the author further asserts that for an organization to efficiently control the level of its inventory it must have efficient physical distribution system in place.

From the table 4.6,83.33% of respondents strongly agreed that physical distribution efficiency is essential for helping an organization like crown beverages ltd plan efficiently while the remaining percentage of 16.67% of the respondents agreed this makes it clear that physical distribution efficiency is essential in helping an organization plan for their out put this is also in line Sandberg, (2007), who asserts that Physical distribution efficiency helps organizations to be certain of the delivery of goods and therefore plan accordingly; this will therefore prevent them from unnecessary costs. .

Table 4.6 indicates that 60% of respondents strongly agreed that physical distribution efficiency enables an organization to earn trust and commitment. 20% agreed while the remaining 20% were neutral over the issue. Due to big percentage of 80 percent in favor this therefore shows that physical distribution efficiency enables an organization to earn trust and commitment, this is also in line with, Janjaapet al, 2005, who asserts that physical distribution efficiency helps an organization to deliver customer orders in time and in return increase on the level of trust and commitment.

Table 4.6 also shows that 50% of the respondents strongly agreed that physical distribution efficiency creates customer service quality to an organization while the remaining 50% agreed this therefore shows that 100% of the respondents agreed that physical distribution efficiency helps an organization to ensure customer service quality, this is also supported b , soon long et al, (2005), who asserts that, Customer service quality is very important in the survival of a business since there can make or break a business depending on the way they are served in an organization.

5.2.2 FACTORS HINDERING PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION EFFICIENCY.

From table 4.7, 60% of the respondents strongly agreed that underdeveloped ICT facilities hinder physical distribution efficiency in an organization while the remaining 40% agreed; this therefore shows that the majority of the respondents agreed that underdeveloped ICT facilities hinder physical distribution efficiency, this is also in line with Handfield et al, (2006),who asserts that Currently most companies are investing heavily on Information And Communication Technologies in order to ensure that the system of physical distribution efficiency is a success in their respective organizations, according to the global statistics, companies like Toyota spend billion improving their physical distribution systems,

According to table 4.7 it indicates that, 73.33 % of the respondents strongly agreed that limited funds hinders physical distribution efficiency in an organization , while 26.67% agreed , while non of the respondents, was neutral, disagreed, and strongly disagreed, this findings also shows that indeed limited funds hinders physical distribution efficiency, this is also in line with Fraser et al, (2012), who asserts that development of efficient physical distribution systems needs substantial amount of funds.

Findings revealed in table 4.7, shows that 50% of the respondents strongly agreed and the remaining percentage also agreed this therefore shows that 100% of the respondents agree with the fact that limited collaboration between buyers and sellers hinders physical distribution efficiency, as cited from Lysonset al, (2006), who asserts that collaboration between buyers and sellers is essential in order to realize the efficiency of the physical distribution system.

Table 4.7 also reveals that 56.67% of the respondents strongly agreed that limited commitment hinders physical distribution in an organization, while the remaining 33.33% of the respondents strongly agreed, this is also contented by Jonsson et al (2006), who asserts that Commitment between buyers and sellers is a necessity in business so that buyers and sellers are sure that the other partners will perform a certain given responsibility as agreed upon and will respect the terms and conditions of the contract, if this is achieved then physical distribution efficiency is achieved.

Table 4.7 also further shows that, majority of the respondents strongly agreed that political instability hinders physical distribution efficiency while 23.33% agreed while non of the respondents were neutral, disagreed or strongly disagreed, this is also in line with, Desler, (2006) who asserts that Most companies are working hard to eliminate the impacts of political instability from affecting their business operations.

5.2.3 EFFECTS OF PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION EFFICIENCY ON CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Table 4.8 reveals that physical distribution efficiency reduces transport costs this is supported by the strong percentage of 46.67% strongly agreeing, while 33.33% agreed this strong support is also in line with Forster et al, (2004) who asserts that Most organization ensure that they meet the demands of the market at all costs in order to ensure that there is efficiency and competitiveness of the business operation in an organization both form the setting of external environment and of the out domestic market, this will also ensure that there is limited communication barriers among companies and as a result companies with efficient distribution system stand out to the most cost efficient.

Table 4.8 also indicates that majority of the respondents strongly and agreed that physical distribution efficiency helps in the proper storage of goods while non of the respondents was neutral, disagreed, and strongly disagreed this therefore shows that physical distribution efficiency ensures proper storage of products, this is also in line with, Wee, (2003) who asserts that, Efficiency in physical distribution has in the recent times been important in the proper storage of goods for future some times for the elimination of the bullwhip effect and in other time to prevent deflation in the market.

Table 4.8 asserts that, 46.67% of the respondents strongly agreed that physical distribution efficiency helps in enabling efficiency in order processing at Crown Beverage Ltd, while 33.33% of the respondents agreed while 20% of the respondents this strong response is also in line with, Sridharan et al, 2005, who asserts that With the aid of communication technologies efficient sharing of information, decision synchronization and incentive alignment, is availed to achieve improvement in the customer service levels.

According to researchers’ findings, 50% of the respondents strongly agreed that physical distribution efficiency helps in enabling proper handling of perishable products. While the rest of respondents agreed this therefore shows great importance of physical distribution efficiency to an organization this is also in line with Lysons et al, (2006), who asserts that when physical distribution is efficient perishable goods are in prevented from breakage.

According to the table 4.8 66.7% of the respondents strongly agreed that physical distribution efficiency helps in meeting customer’s needs at while 16.67 agreed and the remaining percentage disagreed this therefore shows that physical distribution efficiency is essential towards meeting customer’s needs hence the findings are also in line with Farrington et al, (2006), who asserts that when physical distribution is efficient the customer service levels are achieved.

5.3 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS.

The findings indicate that benefits of physical distribution efficiency include promoting of just in time, high degree of operational efficiency, inventory control , helps in planning, trust and commitment is achieved and customer service quality is achieved, while factors hindering physical distribution include; under developed ICT facilities, limited funds, limited collaboration between buyers and sellers, limited commitment and political instability, apart from that effects of physical distribution include, reduction of transport costs, proper storage of products, efficiency in order processing , proper handling of perishable products, and meeting customer’s needs.

5.4 CONCLUSION.

The study concludes that physical distribution efficiency is necessary to achieve customer.

5.5 RECOMMENDATIONS

The study recommends the administration of crown beverages to develop ICT facilities, increase, increase funding on physical distribution infrastructure, and increase on the commitment of buyers and ask the government to maintain political stability.

5.6 AREAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

From the above analysis more studies need to be done in the following areas.

Impact of technology on procurement fraud.
Tools and techniques used to improve procurement effectiveness.
Roles of procurement staff on procurement effectiveness.

THE IMPACT OF PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION EFFICIENCY ON CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

A CASE STUDY: CROWN BEVERAGES LTD.

Dear respondent

I am SENKAAYI MUSLIM a student of Kyambogo University, am carrying out a study on the above stated topic. You are one of the respondents randomly selected to participate in the study. The information given shall be treated with at most confidentiality and shall only be used strictly for academic purpose.

SECTION A: GENERAL DATA

In what capacity are you serving the crown beverages?

Procurement department Administration Distributors

Accountant stores

Sex: Male female

Age a) 18 -29 b) 30 – 39 c) 40 and above

Educational level

Masters degree 1^stdegree diploma others

For how long have you been working with crown beverages?

Less than two years 3-5 years

6-10 years 10 above

Are you well conversant with procurement physical distribution efficiency?

Yes No

What is your responsibility as far as physical distribution efficiency is concerned?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

Does your organization satisfy its customers?

Yes No

If yes (8above), how has it satisfied its customers?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

Have you as an individual ever detected any customer dissatisfaction?

Yes No

Have you ever attended any training in physical distribution efficiency?

Yes No

SECTION B: BENEFITS OF PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION EFFICIENCY

Does your organization work towards physical distribution efficiency?

Yes No

Does physical distribution efficiency poses any benefit to your organization?

Yes No

If yes (1 above), which benefit does it have?

…………………………………………………………………………………..

…………………………………………………………………………………….

Key: SA=strongly agree, A=agree, N=neutral, D=disagree, SD=strongly disagree

Please for question 15 tick one appropriately.

Benefits of physical distribution efficiency	Response
Benefits of physical distribution efficiency	SA	A	N	D	SD
1) promotes just in time
2) High degree of operational performance
3) Inventory control
4) planning is possible
5) Trust and commitment is increased
6) customer service quality

Please mention other benefits of physical distribution efficiency.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Please tick one appropriate.

SECTION C: FACTORS OF PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION EFFICIENCY

Does your organization work towards improving physical distribution efficiency?

Yes No

If yes how does it promote physical distribution efficiency?

…………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………

Please for questions 19 tick one appropriately.

Key: SA=strongly agree, A=agree, N=neutral, D=disagree, SD=strongly disagree

Factors of physical distribution efficiency	Response
Factors of physical distribution efficiency	SA	A	N	D	SD
Under developed ICT facilities
In accessibility
Limited funds
Limited collaboration between suppliers and buyers
Limited commitment
Political instability

Please mention other factors that hinder physical distribution efficiency

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Please tick one appropriate.

SECTION D: EFFECTS OF PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION ON CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Does physical distribution have an effect on customer satisfaction in your organization?

Yes No

If yes mention the effect of physical distribution on customer satisfaction in your organization?

…………………………………………………………………………………………..

………………………………………………………………………………………………

What other factors affect customer satisfaction in your organization?

……………………………………………………………………………………..

Key: SA= Strongly agree, A=agree, N=neutral, D=disagree, SD=strongly disagree

Please questions 24 tick one appropriately

Effects of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction	Response
	SA	A	N	D	SD
Reduction of transport costs
Proper storage of products
Efficiency in order processing
Proper handling of perishable products
Meeting customer needs

Please mention other effects of physical distribution efficiency on customer satisfaction.

THANKS FOR YOUR COOPERATION

REFERENCES:

Rodrique, Jean-Paul, Claude Comtois, and Brian Slack.The Geography of Transportation Systems.Routledge, 2006.

Waterset al (2003), ed. Global Logistics and Distribution Planning: Strategies for Management.

Reibstein et al (2010). Marketing Metrics: The Definitive Guide to Measuring Marketing Performance.

Bimbona, S. (2008). Supply Chain Capabilities and Purchasing Performance of

Durgavich, J., Nabirumbi. B. and Ochaka.S. (2008). Uganda: Mapping the

Distribution of Commercial Goods to the Last Mile.

Heloise, N. (2006). „The Gender Dimension of Communication Technologies in

Jonsson, P. and Gustavsson, M. (2008). The impact of supply chain relationships and

automatic data communication and registration on forecast information

Krejcie, R. V. and Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining Sample Size for Research

Activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607 – 610.

Kyamutetera, M. (2009, April).The CEO Magazine. Business News, Analysis and

People. 51

Masiga, M. F. (2009, Jan 27). New Coca Cola boss marks battle lines Monitor Online.

Mason, R., Lalwani, C., Boughton, R. (2007). Transport management; Horizontal

integration; Supply chain management. Journal of Supply Chain Management:

12, 1359-8546.

Ntayi, J., Gerrit, R. and S. Eyaa. (2009). Supply chain swiftness in a developing

country

Okello, Obura and Majanja. (2007). Assessment of information business problems in

Uganda

Pirtini, S. (2004). The rules of the logistics management in the digital environment

and evaluation of relationship logistics model, 158 – 166.

Rabinovich, E. and Bailey, J. P. (2004). Physical distribution service quality in

Internet retailing: service pricing, transaction attributes, and firm attributes.

Journal of Operations Management, 651–672.

Rabinovich, E., Rungtusanatham, M. and Laseter, M. L. (2008), Physical distribution

service performance and internet retailer margins:

Rushton, A., Croucher and Baker, P. (2006). Handbook of Logistics and Distribution

Sambasivan, J. et‟ al. (2009).Performance measures and metrics for e-supply chains.

Simatupang.M.T. and Sridharan, R. (2002). A Scheme for Information Sharing and

Simatupang, T. M. and Sridharan, R. (2005). The collaboration index: a measure for

supply chain collaboration. International Journal of Physical Distribution and

Logistics Management, 35.

Simatupang, T. M. and Sridharan.R. (2004). A benchmarking scheme for supply

chain collaboration. An International Journal, 11, 9-30.

Stephen J. N. (1997). The scope of supply chain management research Supply Chain

Management, 2. MCB University Press · ISSN 1359-8546

Venus, L. Y. H., Chin-Shan, L. and Kee-hung, L. (2009). Transport Logistics and

Physical Distribution. International Journal of Production Economics, 1-3.

Wang, S. and Archer, N. (2007). Business to Business collaboration through