1|RM

A Report on

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

ORKUT Vs FACEBOOK
Submitted To

Prof. Geetanjali Kapoor

By Leena Singh Prakash Panji Rita Malhan Abha Yadav Anil Varma Avinash Nair P 19 P 23 P 49 P 57 P 58 P 59

In Partial Fulfilment of the Course Requirements of the M.M.S Semester II (2010-2011)

Vidya Prasarak Mandals

Dr V N Bedekar Institute of Management Studies, Thane.

2|RM

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We are extremely grateful to our director Dr. P.M.Kelkar and Prof. Geetanjali kapoor of VPMs Dr. VN BEDEKAR COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT AND STUDIES for their expertise and personal attention because of which we have been able to complete this report successfully. We are also grateful to the students of MMS I who have given us a warm welcome and overwhelming response to our work. We all together welcome any suggestions for the improvement of this project from teachers and students so that we will be able to enhance our capabilities.

3|RM

INDEX
TOPIC 1. Social networking system 2. History 3. Research methodology 4. Questionnaire 5. Formulation of hypothesis 6. Analysis of results 7. Recommendations 8. Conclusion 9. References Page No. 05 06 07 08 15 16 23 24 25

4|RM

Social networking system1

Social network service focuses on building and reflecting of social networks or social relations among people, e.g., who share interests and/or activities. A social network service essentially consists of a representation of each user (often a profile), his/her social links, and a variety of additional services. Most social network services are web based and provide means for users to interact over the internet, such as e-mail and instant messaging. Although online community services are sometimes considered as a social network service in a broader sense, social network service usually means an individual-centered service whereas online community services are group-centered. Social networking sites allow users share ideas, activities, events, and interests within their individual networks. Social networking websites started in the form of generalized online communities such as The WELL (1985), Theglobe.com (1994), Geocities (1994) and Tripod.com (1995). Since 1995 many these social networking sites have entered the Indian continent, Orkut and face book both entering in the year 2004 after making their presence felt world- wide.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_relation

5|RM

History
Facebook
Originally called The facebook, Facebook was founded by former-Harvard student Mark Zuckerberg. with his college roommates and fellow computer science students Eduardo Saverin, Dustin Moskovitz and Chris Hughes.[5] The website's membership was initially limited by the founders to Harvard students, but was expanded to other colleges in the Boston area, the Ivy League, and Stanford University. It later expanded further to include (potentially) any university student, then high school students, and, finally, to anyone aged 13 and over. The website currently has more than 400 million active users worldwide.[6] In August 2005, Thefacebook was officially called Facebook and the domain facebook.com was purchased for a reported $200,000. History is available in 35 languages.Over 175 million active users worldwide currently and is growing every day. Currently it is the number one social network with MySpace and Twitter both behind it.

Orkut
Orkut is named after its creator Google employee Orkut Buyukkokten a Turkish software engineer. It was launched in INDIA on 22nd January 2004 It is a Free-access social networking service owned and operated by Google. It is less popular in the US than in comparison to Facebook and MySpace. Orkut is one of the most visited websites in India and Brazil.(As of May 2009,49.83% of Orkut's users are from Brazil, 17.51% from India). At the end of July 2004 it had 10, 00,000. Till September 2009 it had 30, 00,000 members2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Hughes_%28Facebook%29

6|RM

Research methodology
Research Design Exploratory3 Research is exploratory when you use no earlier model as a basis of your study. The most usual reason for using this approach is that you have no other choice. Normally you would like to take an earlier theory as a support, but there perhaps is none, or all available models come from wrong contexts. Data Collection Primary Data: Data observed or collected directly from first-hand experience4 The research was conducted on the basis of the data collected through the questionnaire. Data collection Instruments Questionnaire The data collected through Questionnaire which was created online with the help of Google document and then mailed to respondents Sample Size 150 Users: questionnaire was circulated among 150 respondents who were using any of the mentioned social networking sites all over the Mumbai region. Type of Sampling Judgmental5 Judgemental sampling Involves selecting a group of people because they have particular traits that the researcher wants to study. The sampling done for the analysis is judgemental as the sample size is from particular age group from 15 to 30 years.

3 4

http://www2.uiah.fi/projects/metodi/177.htm http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/primary-data.html 5 http://www.occ.treas.gov/handbook/sampmeth.pdf

7|RM

Questionnaire
1) Which age group do you fall in?
15-22 23-30

66, 44%

84, 56%

15-23

23-30

2) Is social networking the new way for keeping in touch with your loved ones? Yes No

24, 16%

yes

no

126, 84%
3) Do you have accounts on any social networking site? Facebook Orkut Others

80 60 40 20
8 | R M0

64 40

22

24

facebook

Orkut

Both

Others

1) Where did you first make an account? Facebook Orkut Others

140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0

135 8
orkut facebook

7
others

2) How frequently you use your accounts? Everyday once in a week rarely

95 33 22
Everyday Once in a week Rarely

3) On which account do you have more friends? Facebook Orkut

facebook

44 106
0 20 40 60 80 100 120

orkut

9|RM

4) Do you know about myOrkut on Facebook? Yes No

5) Have you ever accessed Orkut through Facebook? Yes No

150 100 50 0
Q4

135

200 150 100 50

145

15
Yes No

0
Q5

05
Yes No

6) Grade Facebook and Orkut on the following grounds..

Facebook a) b) c) d) e) Orkut a) b) c) d) e) Privacy Application Design Privacy Application Design

New inputs/up gradation of (news fed/status update/link share) Interaction with friends

New inputs/up gradation of (news fed/status update/link share) Interaction with friends

10 | R M

60

Privacy
40

Orkut
20 0
Excellent 80 60 40 20 0
Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor Very Poor No Opinion

Facebook

Good

Satisfactory

Poor

Very poor

No opinion

Application
Orkut Facebook

60 Design 40 Orkut 20 0
Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor Very poor No opinion

Facebook

60

New Updates
40 20 0
Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor Very Poor No Opinion

Orkut Facebook

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor

Communication
Orkut Facebook

Very Poor

No Opinion

11 | R M

7) Are you happy with the new look of Orkut? Yes No

61, 41%

89, 59%

Yes No

8) Do you think the new look is a copied version of Facebook? Yes No cant say

Yes No Cant Say

9) Have these changes made you to access Orkut more often now? Yes No

14 136

yes

no

12 | R M

10) Has controversies surrounding the two sites made you move towards other social networking sites? Yes No

150 100 50 0

Yes

No

11) Bad server. No doughnut 4 you how many times have u faced this problem with the 2 sites? Facebook Orkut
100 80 60 40 20 0 Orkut Facebook
Frequently Rarely Never

Frequently Frequently

Rarely Rarely

Never Never

12) Which site has helped you in your professional life? Facebook
160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
Orkut Facebook

Orkut

Both

Yes No

13 | R M

13) Games/applications on which site keeps you glued to it? Facebook

140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
Orkut Facebook

Orkut

Yes No

14 | R M

Formulation of Hypothesis
Based on the data collected through questionnaire following hypothesis were formulated for various parameters 1. Privacy H0 : There is no significant difference in the privacy of Orkut and Facebook H1 : Orkut has more Privacy than Facebook 2. Application H0 : There is no significant difference in the privacy of Orkut and Facebook H1 : Orkut has more Privacy than Facebook 3. Design H0 : There is no significant difference in the Design of Orkut and Facebook H1 : Orkut has better Design than Facebook 4. New Updates H0 : There is no significant difference in the New Updates of Orkut and Facebook H1 : Orkut has more New Updates than Facebook 5. Communication H0 : There is no significant difference in the Communication of Orkut and Facebook H1 : Orkut has Better Communication than Facebook 6. Popularity H0 : There is no significant difference in the Popularity of Orkut and Facebook H1 : Orkut has more Popularity than Facebook

15 | R M

Analysis and Results (Privacy)

H0 H1 There is no significant difference in the privacy of Orkut and Facebook among the Users in Mumbai Orkut is more Privacy than Facebook in Mumbai Expected value table Privacy Facebook 20 48 39 15 4 24 150 39 90 93 39 7 32 300 Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor Very Poor No Opinion Orkut 19.5 45 46.5 19.5 3.5 16 Facebook 19.5 45 46.5 19.5 3.5 16

Observed value table Privacy Orkut Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor Very Poor No Opinion 19 42 54 24 3 8 150

O 19 42 54 24 3 8 20 48 39 15 4 24

E 19.5 45 46.5 19.5 3.5 16 19.5 45 46.5 19.5 3.5 16

(O-E) -0.5 -3 7.5 4.5 -0.5 -8 0.5 3 -7.5 -4.5 0.5 8

(O-E)^2 0.25 9 56.25 20.25 0.25 64 0.25 9 56.25 20.25 0.25 64 X2 Cal X2 Table

(OE)^2/E 0.012821 0.2 1.209677 1.038462 0.071429 4 0.012821 0.2 1.209677 1.038462 0.071429 4 13.06478 11.1

DF

(12-2)*(2-1) 10

16 | R M

Analysis and Results (Application)

H0 H1 There is no significant difference in the Application of Orkut and Facebook among the Users in Mumbai Orkut is more Application than Facebook in Mumbai Expected value table Application Orku Faceboo t k Excellent 23.84 24.16 Good Satisfactor y Poor Very Poor No Opinion 49.17 42.71 12.91 3.48 15.89 49.83 43.29 13.09 3.52 16.11

Observed value table Application Orkut Excellent Good Satisfactor y Poor Very Poor No Opinion 12 43 58 21 5 9 148 Facebo ok 36 56 28 5 2 23 150 48 99 86 26 7 32 298

O 12 43 58 21 5 9 36 56 28 5 2 23

E 23.84 49.17 42.71 12.91 3.48 15.89 24.16 49.83 43.29 13.09 3.52 16.11

(O-E) -11.84 -6.17 15.29 8.09 1.52 -6.89 11.84 6.17 -15.29 -8.09 -1.52 6.89

(O-E)^2 140.16 38.04 233.74 65.40 2.32 47.51 140.16 38.04 233.74 65.40 2.32 47.51 X2 Cal
2

(O-E)^2/E 5.88 0.77 5.47 5.07 0.67 2.99 5.80 0.76 5.40 5.00 0.66 2.95 41.42

DF

(6-1)*(21) 5

X Table 11.1 Hence null hypothesis is rejected i.e. orkut is better than Facebook for application criterion.
17 | R M

Analysis and Results (Design)

H0 H1 There is no significant difference in the Design of Orkut and Facebook among the Users in Mumbai Orkut has Better Design than Facebook in Mumbai Expected value table Design 41 122 82 20 2 33 300 Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor Very Poor No Opinion Orkut 20.5 61 41 10 1 16.5 Facebook 20.5 61 41 10 1 16.5

Observed value table Design Orkut Facebook Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor Very Poor No Opinion 19 63 45 13 1 9 150 22 59 37 7 1 24 150

O 19 63 45 13 1 9 22 59 37 7 1 24

E 20.5 61 41 10 1 16.5 20.5 61 41 10 1 16.5

(O-E) -1.5 2 4 3 0 -7.5 1.5 -2 -4 -3 0 7.5

(O-E)^2 2.25 4 16 9 0 56.25 2.25 4 16 9 0 56.25 X2 Cal X2 Table

(O-E)^2/E 0.109756 0.065574 0.390244 0.9 0 3.409091 0.109756 0.065574 0.390244 0.9 0 3.409091 9.749329 11.1

DF

(6-1)*(2-1) 5

Hence Accept the null hypothesis as X2 Cal < X2 Table

18 | R M

Analysis and Results (New Updates)

H0 H1 There is no significant difference in the New Updates of Orkut and Facebook among the Users in Mumbai Orkut is more New Updates than Facebook in Mumbai Expected value table New Updates Facebook 38 54 23 8 2 25 150 58 108 68 27 5 34 300 Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor Very Poor No Opinion Orkut 29 54 34 13.5 2.5 17 Facebook 29 54 34 13.5 2.5 17

Observed value table New Updates Orkut Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor Very Poor No Opinion 20 54 45 19 3 9 150

O 20 54 45 19 3 9 38 54 23 8 2 25

E 29 54 34 13.5 2.5 17 29 54 34 13.5 2.5 17

(O-E) -9 0 11 5.5 0.5 -8 9 0 -11 -5.5 -0.5 8

(O-E)^2 (O-E)^2/E 81 0 121 30.25 0.25 64 81 0 121 30.25 0.25 64 X2 Cal X2 Table 2.793103 0 3.558824 2.240741 0.1 3.764706 2.793103 0 3.558824 2.240741 0.1 3.764706 24.91475 11.1

DF

(6-1)*(2-1) 5

Since X2 Cal > X2 Table Hence reject the Null hypothesis.

19 | R M

Analysis and Results (Communication)

H0 H1 There is no significant difference in the Communication of Orkut and Facebook among the Users in Mumbai Orkut has better communication than Facebook in Mumbai Expected value table New Updates 64 113 71 14 6 32 300 Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor Very Poor No Opinion Orkut 32 56.5 35.5 7 3 16 Facebook 32 56.5 35.5 7 3 16

Observed value table New Updates Orkut Facebook Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor Very Poor No Opinion 39 62 32 6 2 9 150 25 51 39 8 4 23 150

O 39 62 32 6 2 9 25 51 39 8 4 23

E 32 56.5 35.5 7 3 16 32 56.5 35.5 7 3 16

(O-E) 7 5.5 -3.5 -1 -1 -7 -7 -5.5 3.5 1 1 7

(O-E)^2 49 30.25 12.25 1 1 49 49 30.25 12.25 1 1 49 X Cal X Table

2 2

(O-E)^2/E 1.53125 0.535398 0.34507 0.142857 0.333333 3.0625 1.53125 0.535398 0.34507 0.142857 0.333333 3.0625 11.90082 11.1

DF

(6-1)*(2-1) 5

Since X2 Cal > X2 Table Hence reject the Null hypothesis.

20 | R M

Analysis and Results (Popularity)

H0 H1 There is no significant difference in the Popularity of Orkut and Facebook among the Users in Mumbai Orkut is more Popular than Facebook in Mumbai Expected value table Popularity Other 0 46 7 2 72 127 150 150 150 150 150 750 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q15 Orkut 93 93 93 93 93 Facebook Other 31.6 31.6 31.6 31.6 31.6 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4

Observed value table Popularity Orkut Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q15 465 126 64 135 106 34 158 Facebook 24 40 8 42 44

O 126 64 135 106 34 24 40 8 42 44 0 46 7 2 72 X2 Cal

E 93 93 93 93 93 31.6 31.6 31.6 31.6 31.6 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 271.4306

(O-E) 33 -29 42 13 -59 -7.6 8.4 -23.6 10.4 12.4 -25.4 20.6 -18.4 -23.4 46.6

(O-E)^2 (O-E)^2/E 1089 841 1764 169 3481 57.76 70.56 556.96 108.16 153.76 645.16 424.36 338.56 547.56 2171.56 11.70968 9.043011 18.96774 1.817204 37.43011 1.827848 2.232911 17.62532 3.422785 4.865823 25.4 16.70709 13.32913 21.55748 85.49449

DF

(5-1)*(3-1) 10

X2 Table 13.26 Since X2 Cal > X2 Table Hence reject the Null hypothesis.
21 | R M

Result of analysis
1. Privacy Null hypothesis is rejected hence orkut has better privacy than Facebook in Mumbai. 2. Design Null hypothesis is rejected hence orkut has better Design than Facebook Design in Mumbai. 3. Application Null hypothesis is rejected hence orkut has better Application than Facebook in Mumbai. 4. New Updates Null hypothesis is accepted hence there is no significant difference between orkut and Facebook as far as New Updates are concerned. 5. Communication Null hypothesis is rejected hence orkut has better Communication than Facebook in Mumbai. 6. Popularity Null hypothesis is rejected hence orkut is more popular than Facebook in Mumbai.

22 | R M

Recommendations
The some of the key areas that must be focused to gain advantage in the competitive scenario of social networking for both Orkut and Facebook Orkut Offer better looking user profile and themes Introduce innovative games Avoid feeding users with the Bad Doughnut Provide a superior privacy option Facebook Games are the USP of Facebook hence to attract more users it can be used as one of the factor Privacy, Design, Application and Updates must be made available on continuous bases. Promote my orkut aggressively. Various promotional schemes must be introduced. Facebook can also organize Event under its name to get Visibility

23 | R M

Conclusion
In the fast moving world today networking sites have revolutionized the concept of communication. Orkut and Facebook have played key role in establishing social links. In India orkut continues to dominate the social networking Domain.

24 | R M

References
Bibliography Gupta.S.P. ,Statistical Methods. Paneersalvam. R ,Research Methodology. Webliography www.socialnetworking.com www.theindianstreet.com www.123orkut.com www.litefacebook.com

25 | R M