2. A DESIGN OF CONVENIENCE STORE FOR ONE UNIT
COMMERCIAL BUILDING
A THESIS
BY
ARTHIT JAITHEAP
Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the Master of Education degee in Industrial Education
at Srinakharinwirot University
October 2006
6. A DESIGN OF CONVENIENCE STORE FOR ONE UNIT
COMMERCIAL BUILDING
AN ABSTRACT
BY
ARTHIT JAITHEAP
Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the Master of Education degee in Industrial Education
at Srinakharinwirot University
October 2006
7. Arthit Jaitheap. (2006). A Design of Convenience Store for One Unit Commercial Building.
Master thesis, M.Ed. (Industrial Education). Bangkok: Graduate School,
Srinakharinwirot University. Advisor Committee: Dr. Pairust Vongyuttakrai,
Assist. Prof. Sompol Dumrongsatian
The research’s objective for design the model of convenience store in a single unit
commercial building type is to propose the alternative model store for small entrepreneur who
desires to establish own store without copyright cost. The store model is to reduce the
conditioned cost of franchisee fee.
Part 1 is the analysis result regarding the comment and requirements of convenience
stores’ users. The researcher himself collected the data and clarified the respondents’ questions
with informative charts. The response rate is complete at 100%, total 100 sets. It was used as
guidelines to create framework of users’ requirements. It was revealed that the most popular
convenience store is 7-Eleven (81.8%). The shopping behavior was recorded at 1-3 times per
week (47%). 7-Eleven was rated the most favorite design (46.2%). The most recognized item
was the “store logo light box” outside the shop (56%). The display shelf, drink cooler and
beverage post-mixed machine are rated as most important area to be improved (30.8%). The
easy recognized, attractive unique model from those existing ones creates good image and
competitive advantage (33.6%). The additional services suggested were photocopy and
laminating services (38.2%). Red was the most recognized color. It is explicit, attractive and
differentiated the store from those existing ones (23.5%).
Part 2 is the efficiency assessment’s result of the convenience stores’ models. On
the first round, the researcher has designed 3 models of convenience stores. Then, he
collected data and clarified the question with chart by himself. All questionnaires forms were
complete and returned total 20 sets. The one which is found most efficient will be selected
and its suggestion will be used as a development guidelines.
The efficiency assessment of type A is scored 3.77; t= -1.27, in good level according
to hypothesis at significant level at .05.
The efficiency assessment of type B is scored 3.98; t = -0.11, in good level according
to hypothesis at significant level at .05.
The efficiency assessment of type C is scored 3.87; t = -0.68, in good level according
to hypothesis at significant level at .05.
The most favorite style is type B, by 11 respondents’ votes. The average score was
read at 3.98, calculated at 55%, t = 0.11, in good level according to hypothesis at significant
level at .05.
8. Part 3 is the assessment’s result of efficiency data. The researcher has enhanced
the store design on the second round. The research himself collected data and clarified the
question with chart. All questionnaires forms were complete and returned at 100%; total 20
sets. The efficiency assessment which covers the aspects of design, production and marketing
criteria was rated in good level. On the design criteria which included physical utility benefit
was average rated at 4.10. The appearance criteria average rated at 4.20. For production
criteria which included material was average rated at 4.33. The furniture manufacturing
process was average rated at 4.35. Marketing criteria was average rated at 4.17, giving
overall efficiency score average at 4.20; t = 2.89, being in good level, according to the
hypothesis at significant level at .05