I typically wonder what factors influence those who respond and those who don’t respond to franchising surveys. This is a summary of selected categories from the ‘Towards Conflict Resolution’ survey from Australia's Griffith University’s Asia‐Pacific Centre for Franchising Excellence. The quantative research report is attached.

The study also indicated that many franchisees were failing to make use of available mediation services to resolve the problems that they had with their franchisor. The Franchising Code of Conduct makes explicit provision for access to cost-effective dispute resolution and mediation procedures, yet only two per cent of franchisees surveyed used mediation to resolve conflict with their franchisor.  Dynamic Business

Respondents time in franchise:

• 4.3% - Less than 1 year
• 39.3% - Between 1 - 3 years
• 22.6% - Between 3.1 - 5 years
• 11.5% - Between 5.1 - 7 years
• 7.4% - Between 7.1 – 9.9 years
• 12.3% - Between 10 - 20 years
• 2.6% - Over 20 years

Categories of responses were mostly broken down to ‘Strongly Disagree’, ‘Agree’, ‘Neutral’, ‘Strongly Agree’.

Prior to Entry:

• 56% reported that they were proactive in seeking out information.
• 38% felt that they were sufficiently diligent in gathering information.
• 51% indicated that they gathered a lot of information.
• 66% indicated that they did not feel that their franchisor withheld important information.
• 47% felt they were offered adequate amounts of information.
• 46% stated that before they entered into the franchise agreement they had all the information they required..
• 49% indicated that they relied heavily on their gut feeling.

Franchise Relationship:

• 60% disagreed that they had no idea of what they were getting into when starting franchising.
• 47% indicated that their expectations of franchising were very accurate.
• 41% agreed with the question asking if they faced any surprises upon buying their franchise.
• 42% indicated that their experience of franchising matched their expectations.

Trust:

• 55% felt that their franchisor was honest with them.
• 54% felt that their franchisor company would uphold the commitments.
• 52% indicated that they could rely on their franchisors to keep any promises.
• 49% felt that their franchisor could be counted on to do what is right.

Communication:

• 45% indicated that communication in their franchise was prompt and timely.
• 52% felt that information provided in their franchise was relevant to decision‐making.
• 41% indicated positively that communication within their franchising relationship were complete.

Conflict:

• 47% felt that communications were accurate.
• 53% stated that information was available within their franchise as it was needed.
• 47% felt that conflict was dealt with openly.
• 44% indicated that alternative opinions in their franchise were encouraged.
• 32% felt that disputes were handled in such a manner as to eventually bring parties closer together.
• 37% agreed with the statement that they knew how to deal with conflict.
• 52% indicated the differences that arose between themselves and their franchisor were usually handled well.

Franchise Agreement:

• 75% stated that they understood the terms of the franchise agreement and any related documents.
• 56% indicated that their franchise agreement gave them adequate space to run their business without interference.
• 62% indicated that the franchise system requirements placed on them by their franchisor were reasonable.
• 56% felt that the interests of their franchise agreement were balanced between themselves and their franchisors.

Perceived Franchisor Support:

• 53% felt that their contribution to the organisation was valued by their franchisor.
• 46% agreed that their franchisor strongly considers their goals and values.
• 59% felt that help was readily available from their franchisor.
• 47% stated that their franchisor understood and accommodated their problems and their needs.
• 54% indicated that their franchisor supported them whenever possible.
• 33% were positive that their franchisor would help them under any circumstances.
• 42% felt that their franchisor was always concerned about their well‐being,
• 42% felt that they could rely on their franchisor to help them if they faced difficulties.

Relationship Satisfaction:

• 53% considered the relationship with their franchisor to be satisfying.
• 54% considered the relationship with their franchisor to be fair.
• 55% considered the relationship with their franchisor to be healthy.
• 63% considered the relationship with their franchisor to be cordial.

Perceived Conflict:

• 74% indicated that there were only low levels of conflict.
• 63% responded that they did not frequently disagree with their franchisor.
• 72% felt that the disagreements they had with their franchisor were not usually intense.
• 75% infrequently argue over important issues with their franchisor.
• 29% indicated that their franchisor makes use of processes which address disputes in a timely manner.

Dispute Handling:

• 36% felt that their franchisor dealt with disputes in such ways as to build trust in the relationship.
• 40% felt that in dealing with disputes, their franchisor was focused on finding ways to meet both parties’ interests.

Occurrence of Disputes:

• 1st year – 38.9% had a disagreement or misunderstanding with the franchisor that needed to be resolved.
• 2nd 3rd year – 41.7%
• 4 plus years – 44.8%

Methods Sought to Achieve Resolution:

• 1st year - 58% sought resolution of dispute with franchisor staff.
• 2nd 3rd year – 58.7%
• 4 plus years – 59.5%

• 1st year – 54.3% sought resolution by negotiation (i.e., agreement via discussion).
• 2nd 3rd year – 51.1%
• 4 plus years –  48.6%

• 4.8% sought resolution by third party involvement (e.g. the ACCC).
• 2nd 3rd year – 5.4%
• 4 plus years – 8.6%

• 6% sought resolution by mediation.
• 2nd 3rd year – 9.1%
• 4 plus years – 10.6%

• 48.2% sought resolution by contact with other franchisees.
• 2nd 3rd year – 46.8%
• 4 plus years – 44.7%

• 11.4% sought resolution by correspondence from solicitors.
• 2nd 3rd year – 10%
• 4 plus years – 16.8%

• 1.2% sought resolution by litigation or Court action.
• 2nd 3rd year – 1.1%
• 4 plus years – 3.6%

Causes of Conflict:

• 15.5% - Lack of support from franchisor
• 11.3% - Compliance with system
• 9.6% - Fees
• 8.9% - Communication problems
• 8.6% - Misrepresentation issues
• 8.6% - Marketing issues
• 6.5% - Profitability
• 5.5% - Franchise agreement issues
• 4.8% - Territorial issues
• 4.1% - Deceitful franchisor behaviour
• 3.8% - Too much control imposed by the franchisor
• 3.8% - Stock issues
• 8.9% - Other causes of dispute

How Conflict Was Dealt With:

• 37% - Verbal negotiation
• 18.2% - No resolution
• 9.5% - Poorly
• 8.7% - Written correspondence
• 4.3% - Written correspondence via solicitor
• 2.4% - Compromise
• 1.6% - Franchisor financial assistance
• 1.6% - Mediation
• 1.6% - Third party involvement
• 1.2% - Franchisee exit
• 1.2% - Court action
• 1.2% - Quickly
• 11.5% - Other

Did the franchisee feel the dispute was resolved?

• 37.5% - No
• 35.3% - Yes satisfactorily
• 13.4% - Yes unsatisfactorily
• 11.6% - Continuing
• 2.2% - Yes in the short term

Prior to purchasing where was information obtained?

• 80.1% - Accountant
• 70.7% - Lawyer
• 42.6% - Franchising websites
• 29% - Franchising/small business consultant
• 25.2% - Trade Magazines
• 16.5% - Franchising Expo
• 6.8% - ACCC

Pre-Purchase Research Time Invested:

• 1.6% - Nil
• 22.4% - Less than 1 month
• 40.6% - 1 to 3 months
• 16.6% - 4 to 6 months
• 9.4% - 7 to 12 months
• 7.8% - 1 to 3 years
• 1.6% - More than 3 years

Other areas of the survey omitted from this summary include formal franchisor conflict resolution processes, conflict resolution training, provision of field staff, number of units, contract terms, start-up investment, prior year turnover, location, gender, age, level of formal education and the age of franchise system.

This survey is reported as resulting from 560 randomly selected franchises [of 1,100], where 3,000 franchisees were randomly selected.  347 usable responses were received [11.5%].

Whether any bias for any reason has influenced these findings there will be those that are adamant that this negative report under-states the true franchising danger. One thing is certain; the survey findings offer scope to accommodate a broad range of conflicting interpretations.