Orkut V s Facebook.docx

7/30/2019 Orkut V s Facebook.docx

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/orkut-v-s-facebookdocx 1/25

1 | R M



2 | R M

A Report on

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

“ORKUT Vs FACEBOOK”

Submitted To

Prof. Geetanjali Kapoor

By

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

In

Partial Fulfilment of the Course Requirements of the

M.M.S Semester II (2010-2011)

Vidya Prasarak Mandal’s

Dr V N Bedekar Institute of Management

Studies, Thane.



3 | R M

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We are extremely grateful to our director Dr. P.M.Kelkar and Prof. Geetanjali kapoor

of VPM‟s 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 fromteachers and students so that we will be able to enhance our capabilities.



4 | R M

INDEX

TOPIC Page No.

1. Social networking system 05

2. History 06

3. Research methodology 07

4. Questionnaire 08

5. Formulation of hypothesis 15

6. Analysis of results 16

7. Recommendations 23

8. Conclusion 24

9. References 25



5 | R M

Social networking system1

Social network service focuses on building and reflecting of social networks orsocial 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 worldwide.

1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_relation

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

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

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-mail

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

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


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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theglobe.com

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripod.com

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripod.com

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theglobe.com

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



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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-mail

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

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

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



6 | R M

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 coll eges 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 domainfacebook.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 members 2

2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Hughes_%28Facebook%29

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



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


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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook#cite_note-4



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


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









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






7 | R M

Research methodology

Research Design – Exploratory3

Research is exploratory when you use no earlier model as a basis of your study. Themost 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

http://www2.uiah.fi/projects/metodi/177.htm4http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/primary-data.html

5http://www.occ.treas.gov/handbook/sampmeth.pdf

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/data.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/experience.html




http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/data.html



8 | R M

Questionnaire

1) Which age group do you fall in?

15-22 23-30

2) Is social networking the new way for keeping in touch with your loved ones?

Yes No

3) Do you have accounts on any social networking site?

Facebook Orkut Others

84,

56%

66,

44%15-23

23-30

126,

84%

24,

16%

yes no

0

20

40

60

80

facebook Orkut Both Others

40

64

22 24



9 | R M

1) Where did you first make an account?

Facebook Orkut Others

2) How frequently you use your accounts?

Everyday once in a week rarely

3) On which account do you have more friends?

Facebook

Orkut

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

orkut facebook others

135

8 7

Everyday

Once in a week

Rarely

95

33

22

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

orkut

facebook 44

106



10 | R M

4) Do you know about „myOrkut‟ on Facebook?

Yes No

5) Have you ever accessed Orkut through Facebook?

Yes No

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

Facebook

a) Privacy

b) Application

c) Design

d) New inputs/up gradation of (news fed/status update/link share)

e) Interaction with friends

Orkut

a) Privacy

b) Application

c) Design

d) New inputs/up gradation of (news fed/status update/link share)

e) Interaction with friends

0

50

100

150

Yes No

15

135

15

135

0

50

100

150

200

Yes No

05

145

Q5Q4



11 | R M

0

20

40

60

Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor Very poor No opinion

Orkut

Facebook

0

20

40

60

80

Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor Very Poor No Opinion

Orkut

Facebook

0

20

40

60

Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor Very poor No opinion

Orkut

Facebook

0

20

40

60


Orkut

Facebook

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70


Orkut

Facebook

Privac

A lication

Desi n

New U dates

Communication



12 | R M

7) Are you happy with the new look of Orkut?

Yes No

8) Do you think the new look is a copied version of Facebook?

Yes No can‟t say

9) Have these changes made you to access Orkut more often now?

Yes No

89,

59%

61,

41%Yes

No

Yes

No

Cant Say

14

136yes

no



13 | R M

10) Has controversies surrounding the two sites made you move towards other social

networking sites?

Yes No

11) “Bad server. No doughnut 4 you” how many times have u faced this problem with

the 2 sites?

Facebook Frequently Rarely Never

Orkut Frequently Rarely Never

12) Which site has helped you in your professional life?

Facebook Orkut Both

0

50

100

150

Yes No

0

20

40

60

80

100

Orkut Facebook

Frequently

Rarely

Never

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Orkut Facebook

Yes

No



14 | R M

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

Facebook Orkut

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Orkut Facebook

Yes

No



15 | 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



16 | R M

Analysis and Results (Privacy)

H0There is no significant difference in the privacy of Orkut and Facebook among the Usersin Mumbai

H1 Orkut is more Privacy than Facebook in Mumbai

Observed value table Expected value table

Privacy Privacy

Orkut Facebook Ʃ Orkut Facebook

Excellent 19 20 39 Excellent 19.5 19.5

Good 42 48 90 Good 45 45

Satisfactory 54 39 93 Satisfactory 46.5 46.5

Poor 24 15 39 Poor 19.5 19.5

Very Poor 3 4 7 Very Poor 3.5 3.5

No Opinion 8 24 32 No Opinion 16 16

Ʃ 150 150 300

O E (O-E) (O-E)^2(O-

E)^2/EDF (12-2)*(2-1)

19 19.5 -0.5 0.25 0.012821 10

42 45 -3 9 0.2

54 46.5 7.5 56.25 1.209677

24 19.5 4.5 20.25 1.038462

3 3.5 -0.5 0.25 0.071429

8 16 -8 64 4

20 19.5 0.5 0.25 0.012821

48 45 3 9 0.2

39 46.5 -7.5 56.25 1.20967715 19.5 -4.5 20.25 1.038462

4 3.5 0.5 0.25 0.071429

24 16 8 64 4

X2

Cal 13.06478

X2

Table 11.1



17 | R M

Analysis and Results (Application)

H0There is no significant difference in the Application of Orkut andFacebook among the Users in Mumbai

H1 Orkut is more Application than Facebook in Mumbai


Application Application

OrkutFacebo

okƩ

Orku

t

Faceboo

k


Good 43 56 99 Good 49.17 49.83

Satisfactor

y

58 28 86Satisfactor

y

42.71 43.29

Poor 21 5 26 Poor 12.91 13.09


No Opinion 9 23 32NoOpinion

15.89 16.11

Ʃ 148 150 298

O E (O-E) (O-E)^2 (O-E)^2/E DF(6-1)*(2-

1)

12 23.84 -11.84 140.16 5.88 5

43 49.17 -6.17 38.04 0.77

58 42.71 15.29 233.74 5.47

21 12.91 8.09 65.40 5.07

5 3.48 1.52 2.32 0.67

9 15.89 -6.89 47.51 2.99

36 24.16 11.84 140.16 5.80

56 49.83 6.17 38.04 0.76

28 43.29 -15.29 233.74 5.40

5 13.09 -8.09 65.40 5.00

2 3.52 -1.52 2.32 0.66

23 16.11 6.89 47.51 2.95

X2 Cal 41.42

X2 Table 11.1

Hence null hypothesis is rejected i.e. orkut is better than Facebook for application

criterion.



18 | R M

Analysis and Results (Design)

H0There is no significant difference in the Design of Orkut andFacebook among the Users in Mumbai

H1 Orkut has Better Design than Facebook in MumbaiObserved value table Expected value table

Design Design



Good 63 59 122 Good 61 61

Satisfactory 45 37 82 Satisfactory 41 41

Poor 13 7 20 Poor 10 10

Very Poor 1 1 2 Very Poor 1 1

No Opinion 9 24 33 No Opinion 16.5 16.5

Ʃ 150 150 300

O E (O-E) (O-E)^2 (O-E)^2/E DF (6-1)*(2-1)

19 20.5 -1.5 2.25 0.109756 5

63 61 2 4 0.06557445 41 4 16 0.390244

13 10 3 9 0.9

1 1 0 0 0

9 16.5 -7.5 56.25 3.409091

22 20.5 1.5 2.25 0.109756

59 61 -2 4 0.065574

37 41 -4 16 0.390244

7 10 -3 9 0.9

1 1 0 0 0

24 16.5 7.5 56.25 3.409091

X2 Cal 9.749329

X2 Table 11.1

Hence Accept the null hypothesis as X2 Cal < X2 Table



19 | R M

Analysis and Results (New Updates)

H0There is no significant difference in the New Updates of Orkut and

Facebook among the Users in MumbaiH1 Orkut is more New Updates than Facebook in Mumbai


New Updates New Updates


Excellent 20 38 58 Excellent 29 29

Good 54 54 108 Good 54 54

Satisfactory 45 23 68 Satisfactory 34 34

Poor 19 8 27 Poor 13.5 13.5



Ʃ 150 150 300

O E (O-E) (O-E)^2 (O-E)^2/E DF (6-1)*(2-1)

20 29 -9 81 2.793103 554 54 0 0 0

45 34 11 121 3.558824

19 13.5 5.5 30.25 2.240741

3 2.5 0.5 0.25 0.1

9 17 -8 64 3.764706

38 29 9 81 2.793103

54 54 0 0 0

23 34 -11 121 3.558824

8 13.5 -5.5 30.25 2.240741

2 2.5 -0.5 0.25 0.1

25 17 8 64 3.764706

X2 Cal 24.91475

X2 Table 11.1

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



20 | R M

Analysis and Results (Communication)

H0There is no significant difference in the Communication of Orkut andFacebook among the Users in Mumbai

H1 Orkut has better communication than Facebook in Mumbai


New Updates New Updates


Excellent 39 25 64 Excellent 32 32

Good 62 51 113 Good 56.5 56.5

Satisfactory 32 39 71 Satisfactory 35.5 35.5

Poor 6 8 14 Poor 7 7Very Poor 2 4 6 Very Poor 3 3


Ʃ 150 150 300

O E (O-E) (O-E)^2 (O-E)^2/E DF (6-1)*(2-1)

39 32 7 49 1.53125 5

62 56.5 5.5 30.25 0.535398

32 35.5 -3.5 12.25 0.34507

6 7 -1 1 0.142857

2 3 -1 1 0.333333

9 16 -7 49 3.0625

25 32 -7 49 1.53125

51 56.5 -5.5 30.25 0.535398

39 35.5 3.5 12.25 0.34507

8 7 1 1 0.142857

4 3 1 1 0.333333

23 16 7 49 3.0625

X2 Cal 11.90082

X2 Table 11.1




21 | R M

Analysis and Results (Popularity)

H0There is no significant difference in the Popularity of Orkut andFacebook among the Users in Mumbai

H1 Orkut is more Popular than Facebook in Mumbai


Popularity Popularity

Orkut Facebook Other Ʃ Orkut Facebook Other

Q2 126 24 0 150 Q2 93 31.6 25.4

Q3 64 40 46 150 Q3 93 31.6 25.4

Q4 135 8 7 150 Q4 93 31.6 25.4

Q5 106 42 2 150 Q5 93 31.6 25.4Q15 34 44 72 150 Q15 93 31.6 25.4

Ʃ 465 158 127 750

O E (O-E) (O-E)^2 (O-E)^2/E DF (5-1)*(3-1)

126 93 33 1089 11.70968 10

64 93 -29 841 9.043011

135 93 42 1764 18.96774106 93 13 169 1.817204

34 93 -59 3481 37.43011

24 31.6 -7.6 57.76 1.827848

40 31.6 8.4 70.56 2.232911

8 31.6 -23.6 556.96 17.62532

42 31.6 10.4 108.16 3.422785

44 31.6 12.4 153.76 4.865823

0 25.4 -25.4 645.16 25.4

46 25.4 20.6 424.36 16.70709

7 25.4 -18.4 338.56 13.32913

2 25.4 -23.4 547.56 21.55748

72 25.4 46.6 2171.56 85.49449

X2

Cal 271.4306

X2

Table 13.26




22 | R M

Result of analysis

1.

PrivacyNull 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 inMumbai.



23 | 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



24 | 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.



References

Bibliography

• Gupta.S.P. ,“Statistical Methods”.

• Paneersalvam. R ,“Research Methodology”.

Webliography

• www.socialnetworking.com

• www.theindianstreet.com

• www.123orkut.com• www.litefacebook.com

Documents

Orkut V s Facebook.docx