A STUDY ON THE 360 DEGREE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL OF LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, NEYYATTINKARA

UNIVERSITY
Mini Project Report Submitted by
JACKSON JEEVARAJ.J 08BA102

Under the guidance of

Mr. Sugumaran,

Assistant Proffessor, Karunya School of Management. Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements For the award of the degree of MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
Of KARUNYA UNIVERSITY

2008-2010
KARUNYA SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT

KARUNYA UNIVERSITY
1

COIMBATORE 641 114.

CERTIFICATE
2

CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the project entitled, A STUDY ON THE 360 DEGREE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL OF LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, NEYYATTINKARA is the bonafide work done by Mr. Jackson Jeevaraj. J, Reg.No.

08BA102 and is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Business Administration of the Karunya Deemed University.

(Mr. Sameul Joseph)

ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR

(Mr.Sugumaran)
FACULTY GUIDE

Place: Date:

Viva-Voce Examination held on

Internal Examiner

External Examiner

DECLARATION
4

DECLARATION
I hereby declare, the project work entitled A STUDY ON THE 360 DEGREE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL OF LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, NEYYATTINKARA submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, as a record of original work done

by me under the supervision and guidance of Mr. Sugumaran, Assistant Proffessor, Karunya School of Management, Karunya Institute of Technology & Sciences, Coimbatore. This project work has not formed the basis for the award of any Degree/Diploma/ Associate-ship /Fellowship of similar titles to any candidate of any university.

Place: Date:

Signature of the student

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
6

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

At the outset I thank God almighty for helping me to complete this project work successfully. I believe that nothing would have been possible without Gods grace and guidance. My deepest love and never ending gratitude goes to my family for their encouragement and motivation.

I take this opportunity to thank Mr. Russel Peter, Director K S M, for giving this opportunity and experiencing the work environment by the project study. I most respectfully acknowledge my most sincere gratitude to my Internal guide Mr. Sugumaran, for all the patient guidance, motivation, cooperation and valuable advice towards the timely completion of the project.

I express my sincere thanks to C.Stephen, Senior Branch Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Neyyattinkara for granting permission to me to do my organizational study and for all the timely advice, help, support and service provided towards the completion of the work.

I would like to express my thanks to all my friends and relatives, who have helped me out in the successful completion of the project.

TABLE OF CONTENT
8

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Chapter I 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 Chapter II Chapter III Chapter IV Chapter V 5.1 5.2 5.3 Introduction

Contents

Page No 17 18 18 18 19 21 22

Importance of the study Scope of study Objective of the study Review of Literature Limitations of the study Research Methodology Profile of the Organization

24 360 degree Performance Appraisal Analysis and Interpretation Finding, Suggestion and Conclusion Findings Recommendations Conclusions Bibliography Annexure 30 34 69 70 73 74 75 77

LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF TABLES Cadre of the employees Gender of the employees PAGE NO 35 36 SL: NO 4:1 4:2

10

Age of the employees Marital status of employees Type of the family of the employees Number of members in the family of the employees Place of residence of the employees Years of experience of the employees Whether the management is concerned about employee development Whether the management coaches the employees to perform better Whether the management delegates the work effectively Whether the management motivates to achieve their goal Whether the management listens and conveys ideas Whether the management helps to take initiative Whether the management considers the ability as a leader Whether the management creates ability to analyze problems. Whether the management demonstrates the work methods Whether the management encourages the employee Whether the management uses appraisal methods honestly Whether the management provides ability to set high class standards. Whether the management ensures the work according the accuracy. Whether the management maintains safety standards to the employee Whether the management demonstrate steadiness in stressful situation.

37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

4:3 4:4 4:5 4:6 4:7 4:8 4:9 4:10 4:11 4:12 4:13 4:14 4:15 4:16 4:17 4:18 4:19 4:20 4:21 4:22 4:23 11

Whether the management demonstrates to manage time with the work. Whether the management makes the employees build relationships. Whether the management demonstrates the knowledge required Whether the management helps to understand the problems of others. Whether the management advices to work well in a team setting. Whether the management encourages to work with cooperation. Whether the management is concerned in the best use of materials. Correlation Regression

58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66

4:24 4:25 4:26 4:27 4:28 4:29 4:30 4.31 4.32

12

LIST OF CHARTS

LIST OF CHARTS Cadre of the employees Gender of the employees Age of the employees

PAGE NO 36 37 38

SL: NO 4:1 4:2 4:3 13

Marital status of employees Type of the family of the employees Number of members in the family of the employees Place of residence of the employees Years of experience of the employees Whether the management is concerned about employee development Whether the management coaches the employees to perform better Whether the management delegates the work effectively Whether the management motivates to achieve their goal Whether the management listens and conveys ideas Whether the management helps to take initiative Whether the management considers the ability as a leader Whether the management creates ability to analyze problems. Whether the management demonstrates the work methods Whether the management encourages the employee Whether the management uses appraisal methods honestly Whether the management provides ability to set high class standards. Whether the management ensures the work according the accuracy. Whether the management maintains safety standards to the employee Whether the management demonstrate steadiness in stressful situation. Whether the management demonstrates to manage time with the work.

39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 53 54 55 56 57 59 61 62 63

4:4 4:5 4:6 4:7 4:8 4:9 4:10 4:11 4:12 4:13 4:14 4:15 4:16 4:17 4:18 4:19 4:20 4:21 4:22 4:23 4:24 14

Whether the management makes the employees build relationships. Whether the management demonstrates the knowledge required Whether the management helps to understand the problems of others. Whether the management advices to work well in a team setting. Whether the management encourages to work with cooperation. Whether the management is concerned in the best use of materials.

64 65 66 67 68 69

4:25 4:26 4:27 4:28 4:29 4:30

15

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTI ON
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND DESIGN OF THE STUDY
The history of performance appraisal is quite brief. Its roots in the early 20th century can be traced to Taylor's pioneering Time and Motion studies. But this is not very helpful, for the same may be said about almost everything in the 16

field of modern human resources management. As a distinct and formal management procedure used in the evaluation of work performance, appraisal really dates from the time of the Second World War - not more than 60 years ago. In many organizations - but not all - appraisal results are used, either directly or indirectly, to help determine reward outcomes. That is, the appraisal results are used to identify the better performing employees who should get the majority of available merit pay increases, bonuses and promotions. By the same token, appraisal results are used to identify the poorer performers who may require some form of counseling, or in extreme cases, demotion, dismissal or decreases in pay. (Organizations need to be aware of laws in their country that might restrict their capacity to dismiss employees or decrease pay.) The purpose of this study has been to determine whether the performance appraisal used by the organization satisfies the employees under various category and whether the appraisal was emphasized as an important part of the performance appraisal process.

1:1 Importance of the study The present study is expected to identify the factors of dissatisfaction in the 360 degree performance appraisal system which would directly improve the employee performance thereby significantly increasing the company profit.

17

 This study will also enable the personnel department to identify the factors influencing the performance appraisal which leads to turn over of the employees due to the dissatisfaction with the performance appraisal given to them.

1:2

Scope of the study To identify the behavior and the honesty of the company in giving performance appraisal. To suggest in what factors the company has to show their attention regarding performance appraisal. To know the opinion of the employees, about the companys 360 degree performance appraisal system.

1:3 Objectives of the study Conduct a study on the 360 degree performance appraisal among the employees of Life Insurance Corporation of India, Neyyattinkara branch. To study the satisfactory level of employees on the performance appraisal given by the company To identify the factors on which the employees are dissatisfied with the performance appraisal given to them.

1:4 Review of Literature According to Mary N. Vinson, A 1993 survey on 100 fortune 500 companies by the Wyatt company showed that only 10 percent of the employees were satisfied with their performance appraisal systems. Most said that annual reviews that were perfunctory discussions that dealt mainly with salary. Still, other 18

surveys indicate that most employees think performance appraisals are a good idea. They want to know where they stand and what they must do to improve. If the employees say that they are dissatisfied with the current appraisal system, what is the alternative? One alternative is 360 degree feedback which is also called multirater feedback, upward appraisal, full-circle feedback, and peer review. Though many companies are still using one-way, downward feedback, another Wyatt study showed a beginning trend in upward feedback. The 1992 study found that subordinates were critiquing their superiors and peers in 12 percent of the 397 U.S. companies surveyed. By 1993, the figure was up to 26 percent.

Upward feedback: Upward feedback gathers behavioural observations from different groups within an organization. The feedback providers bosses, peers, and subordinates fill out a form that summarizes an employees skills, abilities, styles, and job related competencies. Theres no ideal number of feedback providers. Typically, external assessment consultants request four to ten feedback providers per feedback receipent. Most consultant say that who gives feedback is more important than how many. As a director, Mary N. Vinson says that in a large company, her experience with 360 degree feedback was in 1991, at a six week executive program at the university of Pittsburgh. At the time, 360 degree feedback was rarely used. She received a Leadership Practices Inventory that required her to conduct a self assessment and distribute assessment surveys to her peers, subordinates, and the boss. She probably chose the best candidates for feedback was anonymous, though it was grouped by the categories peer, subordinates, and superior . He Back then she thought that feedback from bosses was the most valuable because they made the decisions about salaries and promotions. Other people had told that they felt the same way.

Downward feedback:

19

Feedback can hurt. Evaluators arent always nice or positive. People can see their role as a feedback provider as an opportunity to criticize others behavior on the job. Interestingly , many feedback experts say that the most devastating criticism to the people is to be labeled untrustworthy . Another flaw concerns conflicting opinions. Who decides who is right? Whats more, employees can stack the deck by choosing their friends to provide feedback. Then one has to question how valuable the process is. Another potential problem is when people experience survey fatigue from having to fill countless forms. How accurate and reliable is the feedback. Another area for concern is whether the feedback is truthful. Suppose that you have to fill out a form on someone you dont like. Its difficult to own up to negative feelings on paper, so you might equivocate. Or, you might vent. Mary admits that she has been less than candid on occasion, often because she doesnt want to answer certain questions or hurt someones feelings. Whatever the reason, if the feedback isnt truthful, it isnt going to be useful. Does 360 degree feedback improve performance? Too often, managers receive feedback, resolve to do better, and nothing changes. That can happen whether the feedback is 360 degree or traditional, especially when it involves a strong personality. According to feedback specialists at the Center for Creative Leadership in Greensboro, North Carolina, it takes massive doses of feedback for some peoples lights to come on. People may intend to act on feedback but then feel that they are too busy to change their behavior. Or, they may lose their commitment. Or, they may run into resistance from their subordinates and bosses. They may even convince themselves that the feedback isnt true, especially if it wasnt a universally held opinion. Perhaps the fault lies in the feedback instrument. In one case, a company recently began using 360 degree feedback to assess its senior ranks. Executive officers were asked to complete a self assessment and to distribute feedback surveys to two direct reports and two indirect reports to complete. The executives could also give the form to two peers. The executives were apprehensive. It had been a long time since lower level people had appraised them. The feedback instrument included seven rating areas and some open ended questions. The executives expected the open ended portion to benefit them most, assuming that 20

the feedback providers would be candid a big assumption considering that people were rating the most senior executives. In fact, many of the subordinates thought that it was dangerous to be completely truthful in this situation. Once the feedback was compiled and tabulated, the executives were supposed to call a consultant to discuss the results. Some called; some didnt. When they were asked whether theyd acted on the feedback, some said that they tried to pay attention to what everyone was saying. But all of them admitted that it was very easy to slip back into their usual behavior.

1.4 Limitations of the study Any research has its own limitation. The limitation may be due to time and source of information and knowledge. The researcher had faced many of these constrains .The limitation which I had undergone during this study, were, It is not sure that the sample which were selected for collecting data may represent the whole population No scientific method was used in choosing the samples for the study The time specified for the duration for the study was very limited The data given by the employees may not be true or correct. But these data was taken for the analysis .so it may affect the accuracy of the result of this study

1.6 Research Methodology

Research design:

21

As research design is the arrangement of the conditions and analysis of data in a manner that aims to combine relevance to the research purpose with economy in procedure. The study is Descriptive in nature. On the basis of the information collected logical conclusions have been drawn. Descriptive research: Descriptive studies are concerned with describing the characteristics of a particular individual or group. Often by creating a profile of a group of problems, people, or events through the collection of data and the tabulation of the frequencies on research variables. The study reveals who, what, when, where, or how much. The Descriptive study well structured it is necessary that the researcher give sufficient thought to frame the research questions and deciding. Thus the study is descriptive in nature where the data is collected through well structured questionnaire and from the information available in the organization. Source of data collection: Primary data and secondary data were used to analyze the information obtained. Primary data: The primary data is collected from the respondents through the well structured questionnaire. The data was collected through direct methods that are directly from the respondents from different the LIC employees from Neyyattinkara branch office.

The responses are collected on a 4 point scale. The scores are: 1------- Strongly disagree

22

2------- Disagree 3------- Agree 4------- Strongly agree Secondary data: The secondary data was collected from internal source as well as external source. Internal source of data is collected from website magazines, HR manuals etc. The external source of data is collected from the Internet and also from the textbooks.

Sampling design: A sample design is a definite plan for obtaining a sample from a given population. The survey was conducted from a population of 60 employees was taken and then the survey was conducted.

Sample size and area: The sample size collected for this research is 54, which has been collected from LIC employees from Neyyattinkara branch office.

23

CHAPTER II

24

PROFILE OF THE ORGANISATION

ORGANISATION PROFILE The geographical area of this branch is 571 sq. kms.

The Neyyattinkara Branch under Thiruvananthapuram Division started functioning on 28.07.1984. The jurisdiction of the branch is over the entire Neyyattinkara Taluk excluding Thiruvallam Panchayat and adding Kattakada Panchayat to the branch area from Vellanad block.

Kanyakumari and Thirunelveli Districts of Tamilnadu surround the branch area on the Southy and East, the Thiruvananthapuram and Nedumangad Taluks cover the Northern side and west is protected by Arabian Sea.

Neyyattinkara

has a rich cultural heritage. It could be proud of some famous

personalities like Swadesabhimani Ramakrishna Pillai, the well known revolutionary in the history of Malayalam journalism. There is an auditorium in Neyyattinkara town in the memory of the late. Sri. Ramakrishna Pillai. The general terrain of the land is of hilly, and rubber plantations dominate the Eastern of the Taluk.

Neyyattinkara is not largely industrialized. Agriculture is the major source of income of people. Coconut is the main crop. Paddy and other crops bear only a small portion of the total agricultural output. Now a days, because of intensive KHDP activities, vegetable growers, 25

mainly banana growers flourish well in the field of agriculture. Diary and poultry are also mainly undertaken as resources of income. A good lot of Co operative milk societies, mainly KSHEERA, the most profitable milk societies in Kerala, are in our area.

There are only a very few industrial establishments in the area. Kerala Automobiles Ltd., is a famous industry working in this area. Handloom weaving is another industry of importance. Balaramapuram is very famous for its handloom textile products. An eminent portion of the population depends on handloom weaving for their livelihood. A substantial part of the rural population depends on the brick making industry.

Neyyattinkara Taluk is having a very lengthily seashore. Many people are engaged in fishing activity. A very large Fishing harbor project is under construction at Vizhinjam. This area is thickly populated and the per capital income is low, since a major portion of the population depends on agriculture.

The internationally famous Kovalam beach resort is situated in our branch area. Hotel industry in and around Kovalam is a flourishing well in these areas. Neyyar Dam is another place of tourist importance. The traditional Ayurveda resorts are functioning well in these areas. Neyyattinkara town is the main urban centre and Taluk head quarters. Our branch is situated near KSRTC bus station in the town.

Area and Population:

Area under the branch office in sq. kms Rural

571.00 556.00

26

% to total Urban % to total Number of Districts Number of Taluks / Blocks Number of Villages Total population Rural % to total Urban % to total Working population Female Male

97.37 15.00 2.63 1 4 30 871,249 807,057 92.63 64,192 7.37 258,400 434,992 436,257

Insurance potential:

Rural Insurable Population Insured Population 400,000 136,601

Urban 28,000 9,825

Total 425,000 146,426

Segment I Segment II 50,000 27,105 212,500 72,906

Segment III 138,500 45,326

Segment IV 27,000 1,089

27

Potential Available

263,399

18.175

281,574

22,895

139,594

93,174

25,911

Potential market groups in the area fishing, diary, handloom, Co-operative societies, etc.. Agriculture, tourism,

BLOCK PROFILE

Athiyanoor Block ( Population 99855 ) Name of Panchayats 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Athiyanoor Karakonam Kottukal Kanjiramkulam Thiruvallam Venganoor Vizhinjam Situated in Neyyattinkara Taluk. About 70% population dependson agriculture, 20% in weaving, processing coir and household coir and household and cottage industries and 10% service sector. There is long 10% service sector. There is longThere is a long coastal belt, hence fishing is the livelihood of large number of people. Neyyar irrigation project caters to irrigation facilities of the block. Famous Kovalam beach is a part of the block. Famous Kovalam beach is a part of this block

28

Nemom Block ( Population 255800 ) Name of Panchayats 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Balaramapuram Kalliyoor Maranallor Marukil Nemom Pallichal Vilappil Vilavoorkal Lies adjacent to Thiruvananthapuram city. About 55% depend on agricultural activities. 20% in weaving, bamboo furnitures metal britting, brick making, pottery, handicraft other activities are milk processing, milk product, industry, garment making, etc. Remaining 25% depend on service sector. Agricultural college Research Institute Vellayani, Regional Laboratory. Balaramapuram Kyathari is famous throughout India.

Parassala Block ( Population 170644 ) Name of Panchayats 1 2 3 4 5 6 Chenkal Karode Kulathoor Parassala Poovar Thirupuram Lies at the south extreme of the state Agriculture fisheries are the important activities. Other activites are Pottery Brcks making, Palm leaf works, Black smithy, Banana cultivitation, Pig breeding, etc

29

Perumkadavila Block ( Population )

Name of Panchayats 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Amboori Aryancode Kallikad Kollayil Kunnathukal 60% of people depend on Agriculture & 25% in secondary sector like poultry, diary, etc.. There are women's industrial co-operative societies, khadi

Ottasekharamangalam women's Industrial centre, co-operative handloom Perumkadavila Perumpazhuthoor Vellarada production centre in this block.

Objectives of LIC:

Spread Life Insurance and provide life insurance protection to the masses at a reasonable cost. Mobilize peoples savings through insurance linked savings schemes. Invest the funds to serve the best interests of both the policy holders and the nation. Conduct business with maximum economy, remembering always that the money belongs to the policy holders. 30

 Acts as Trustees of the policyholders and protect their individual and collective interests. Innovate and adapt to meet the changing life insurance needs of the community. Involve all the people working in the Corporation to ensure efficient and courteous service to the insured public. Promote amongst all agents and employees of the Corporation a sense of participation, pride and job satisfaction through dedicated service to achieve the corporate objectives.

31

CHAPTER III 360 DEGREE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

360 DEGREE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 360 degree performance appraisal, also known as 'multi-rater feedback', is the most comprehensive appraisal where the feedback about the employees performance comes from all the sources that come in contact with the employee on his job.

360 degree respondents for an employee can be his/her peers, managers (i.e. superior), subordinates, team members, customers, suppliers/ vendors - anyone who comes into contact with the employee and can provide valuable insights and information or feedback regarding the on-the-job performance of the employee. It is based on the assessment of an individual's management styles, competencies and behaviour by colleagues horizontally and vertically by involving his boss, peers and direct reports in the organization.

32

360-degree feedback is a multi source assessment, which includes * Self, * Supervisor * Internal Customers/peers/Staffs * External Customers

Need for 360 degree feedback : Business is towards surplus generation. Without surplus no organisation can grow. Here the effort to grow the business and the surplus should come from employee part. The performance of the employees is at work here matters in business development and organisational development. The performance of the employees should then align with the strategic decisions that integrate the business goals in an increasingly competitive environment. It is the responsibility of the Human Resource Management to integrate the culture of the organisation with all available resources to the optimum out put. The 3600 Appraisal helps the HR Department to have better understanding of the competitive advantage and disadvantages of the current manpower resources and tune them towards performance excellence and productivity. Uses for 360 Degree Feedback include:

Performance Appraisal

33

o Recognition of performance. o Providing feedback on individual performance. o Providing a basis for self-evaluation.

Assessing Employee Development: o Diagnosing training and career development needs. o Providing a basis for promotion, dismissal, job enrichment, job enlargement, job transfer, probation, etc. o Monetary and other rewards.

Organizational Climate Study: o Organisational environment improvement needs o Changes in the Managerial approaches, leadership, etc

How 360-degree feedback system adds value? 360 degree feedback enables an organization to focus on developmental efforts, at the individual and group level, in the present business environment where the success of the company depends on continuous revolution, which is possible through organizational development. 360-degree feedback facilitates the alignment of individual capabilities and behaviors with organizational strategies. It adds value to the organization indifferent ways:

360-degree feedback provides a better understanding of individuals performance at work 360-degree feedback provides a multifaceted view about the employees from different sources

360-degree feedback provides a better understanding of employed developmental needs 34

360-degree feedback provides increased the understanding about one's role expectations.

360-degree feedback provides increased the understanding of competence and competency in various roles

360-degree feedback extends better morale to those who perform and contribute well to the organisation

360-degree feedback reduces training costs by identifying common development needs.

360-degree feedback increases the team's ability to contribute to the organizations goals

360-degree feedback helps everyone to work for a common standard and institutionalize performance management.

360-degree feedback ensure better interpersonal relationship and group cohesiveness

It promotes self-directed learning and provides a road map for employee's development planning.

It promotes better Communication within departments.

35

Chapter IV DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
4.1 Table showing the cadre of the employees

36

Cadre of the employee Frequency HGA 35 asst.admin officer 12 Temporary assistant. 2 admin officer 3 Sr. Branch Manager 1 Asst. Branch Manager 1 Total 54 Percent 64.8 22.2 3.7 5.6 1.9 1.9 100.0 Valid Percent 64.8 22.2 3.7 5.6 1.9 1.9 100.0 Cumulative Percent 64.8 87.0 90.7 96.3 98.1 100.0

Valid

4.1

Chart showing the cadre of the employees

Cadre of the employee

70 60 50 40 30 20

Percent

10 0 HGA Temporary assistant. asst.admin officer Sr. Branch Manager Asst. Branch Manager admin officer

Cadre of the employee

INFERENCE: The above table interprets that this survey got 64.8% of respondents working as HGA, 22.2% of respondents working as Assistant Administrative Officer, 5.6 % of respondents working as Administrative Officer, and 3.7 % of respondents working as Temporary Assistant. 4.2 Table showing the gender of the employees

37

Gendre of the employee Frequency 27 27 54 Percent 50.0 50.0 100.0 Valid Percent 50.0 50.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 50.0 100.0

Valid

Male Female Total

4.2

Chart showing the gender of the employees

Gendre of the employee

60

50

40

30

20

Percent

10 0 Male Female

Gendre of the employee

INFERENCE: The above table interprets that 50% of employees are male and the remaining 50% of the employees responds are female.

4.3

Table showing the age of the employee

38

Age of the employee Frequency 5 40 9 54 Percent 9.3 74.1 16.7 100.0 Valid Percent 9.3 74.1 16.7 100.0 Cumulative Percent 9.3 83.3 100.0

Valid

<30 31-50 >30 Total

4.3

Chart showing the age of the employee

Age of the employee

80

60

40

20

Percent

0 <30 31-50 >30

Age of the employee

INFERENCE: The above table interprets that 9.3% of employees are below the age of 30, 74.9% of employees are between the age of 31 to 50, and 16.7% of employees are above the age of 50.The graph also explains the same.

4.4

Table showing marital status of the employee

39

Marital status of the employee Frequency 53 1 54 Percent 98.1 1.9 100.0 Valid Percent 98.1 1.9 100.0 Cumulative Percent 98.1 100.0

Valid

Married Unmarried Total

4.4

Chart showing marital status of the employee

Marital status of the employee

120

100

80

60

40

Percent

20

0 Married Unmarried

Marital status of the employee

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 98.1% of the employees are married and 1.9% of employee are not married.

4.5

Table showing the employees type of family

40

Employees type of family Frequency Nuclear family 39 Joint family 15 Total 54 Percent 72.2 27.8 100.0 Valid Percent 72.2 27.8 100.0 Cumulative Percent 72.2 100.0

Valid

4.5

Chart showing the employees type of family

Employees type of family

80

60

40

20

Percent

0 Nuclear family Joint family

Employees type of family

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 70.4% of the employees are from a nuclear family, and 27.4% of the employees are from a joint family.

4.6

Table showing number of members in the family

41

Number of members in the family Frequency 4 38 12 54 Percent 7.4 70.4 22.2 100.0 Valid Percent 7.4 70.4 22.2 100.0 Cumulative Percent 7.4 77.8 100.0

Valid

<2 3-4 >4 Total

4.6

Chart showing number of members in the family

Number of members in the family

80

60

40

20

Percent

0 <2 3-4 >4

Number of members in the family

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 7.4% of employees has number of family members below 2, 70.4% of employees has number of family members between 3 to 4 and 22.2% of employees has number of family members above 4.

4.7

Table showing the place of residence of the employees

42

Place of residence of the employee Frequency 24 19 11 54 Percent 44.4 35.2 20.4 100.0 Valid Percent 44.4 35.2 20.4 100.0 Cumulative Percent 44.4 79.6 100.0

Valid

Urban Rural Semi-urban Total

4.7

Chart showing the place of residence of the employees

Place of residence of the employee

50

40

30

20

10

Percent

0 Urban Rural Semi-urban

Place of residence of the employee

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 44.4 % of employees live in an urban area, 35.2 % of employees live in a rural area and 20.4 % of employees live in a semi-urban area.

4.8

Table showing the employees years of experience

43

Employees years of experience Frequency 9 19 16 10 54 Percent 16.7 35.2 29.6 18.5 100.0 Valid Percent 16.7 35.2 29.6 18.5 100.0 Cumulative Percent 16.7 51.9 81.5 100.0

Valid

<5 6-15 16-20 >20 Total

4.8

Chart showing the employees years of experience

Employees years of experience

40

30

20

10

Percent

0 <5 6-15 16-20 >20

Employees years of experience

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 16.7% of employees has a job experience below 5 years, . 35.2% of employees has a job experience between 6-15years, .29.6% of employees has a job experience between 16 to 20 years, and 18.5% of employees has a job experience above 20 years.
4.9 Table showing whether the management is concerned about employee development

44

Management is concerned about the develpoment. Frequency Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 7 Agree 37 Strongly agree 8 Total 54 Percent 3.7 13.0 68.5 14.8 100.0 Valid Percent 3.7 13.0 68.5 14.8 100.0 Cumulative Percent 3.7 16.7 85.2 100.0

Valid

4.9

Chart showing whether the management is concerned about employee development

Management is concerned about the develpoment.

80

60

40

20

Percent

0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management is concerned about the develpoment.

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 3.7% of employees strongly disagrees, 13% of employees disagree, 68.5% of employees agree and 14.8% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor is concerned about the development of the employees.
4.10 Table showing whether the management coaches the employees to perform better

45

Management coaches to perform better Frequency Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 7 Agree 35 Strongly agree 10 Total 54 Percent 3.7 13.0 64.8 18.5 100.0 Valid Percent 3.7 13.0 64.8 18.5 100.0 Cumulative Percent 3.7 16.7 81.5 100.0

Valid

4.10

Chart showing whether the management coaches the employees to perform better

Management coaches to perform better

70 60 50 40 30 20

Percent

10 0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management coaches to perform better

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 3.7% of employees strongly disagrees, 13% of employees disagree, 64.8% of employees agree and 18.5% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor help in coaching people to perform better
4.11 Table showing whether the management delegates the work effectively and efficiently to the employees

46

Management delegates the work effectively and efficiently Frequency Strongly disagree 4 Disagree 7 Agree 37 Strongly agree 6 Total 54 Percent 7.4 13.0 68.5 11.1 100.0 Valid Percent 7.4 13.0 68.5 11.1 100.0 Cumulative Percent 7.4 20.4 88.9 100.0

Valid

4.11

Chart showing whether the management delegates the work effectively and efficiently to the employees

Management delegates the work effectively and efficiently

80

60

40

20

Percent

0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management delegates the work effectively and efficiently

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 7.4% of employees strongly disagrees, 13% of employees disagree, 68.5% of employees agree and 11.1% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor delegates the work effectively and efficiently through the managers
4.12 Table showing whether the management motivates the employees to achieve their goal.

47

Management motivates to achieve their goal Frequency Disagree 9 Agree 30 Strongly agree 15 Total 54 Percent 16.7 55.6 27.8 100.0 Valid Percent 16.7 55.6 27.8 100.0 Cumulative Percent 16.7 72.2 100.0

Valid

4.12

Chart showing whether the management motivates the employees to achieve their goal.

Management motivates to achieve their goal

60

50

40

30

20

Percent

10 0 Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management motivates to achieve their goal

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 16.7% of employees strongly disagrees, 0% of employees disagree, 55.6% of employees agree and 27.8% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor motivates the employees to achieve their goals.
4.13 Table showing whether the management listens and conveys ideas to the employees.

48

Management listens and conveys ideas Frequency Disagree 5 Agree 33 Strongly agree 16 Total 54 Percent 9.3 61.1 29.6 100.0 Valid Percent 9.3 61.1 29.6 100.0 Cumulative Percent 9.3 70.4 100.0

Valid

4.13

Chart showing whether the management listens and conveys ideas to the employees.

Management listens and conveys ideas

70 60 50 40 30 20

Percent

10 0 Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management listens and conveys ideas

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 0% of employees strongly disagrees, 9.3% of employees disagree, 61.1% of employees agree and 29.6% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor effectively listens, receives and conveys ideas to the employees.
4.14 Table showing whether the management helps the employees to take initiative

49

Management helps to take intiative Frequency Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 7 Agree 35 Strongly agree 10 Total 54 Percent 3.7 13.0 64.8 18.5 100.0 Valid Percent 3.7 13.0 64.8 18.5 100.0 Cumulative Percent 3.7 16.7 81.5 100.0

Valid

4.14

Chart showing whether the management helps the employees to take initiative

Management helps to take intiative

70 60 50 40 30 20

Percent

10 0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management helps to take intiative

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 3.7% of employees strongly disagrees, 13% of employees disagree, 64.8% of employees agree and 18.5% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor helps the employee to take the initiative to meet the internal and external customer needs in a timely and politely
4.15 Table showing whether management considers the ability of the employees as a leader.

50

Management considers the ability as a leader Frequency Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 8 Agree 35 Strongly agree 9 Total 54 Percent 3.7 14.8 64.8 16.7 100.0 Valid Percent 3.7 14.8 64.8 16.7 100.0 Cumulative Percent 3.7 18.5 83.3 100.0

Valid

4.15

Chart showing whether management considers the ability of the employees as a leader.

Management considers the ability as a leader

70 60 50 40 30 20

Percent

10 0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management considers the ability as a leader

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 3.7% of employees strongly disagrees, 14.8% of employees disagree, 64.8% of employees agree and 16.7% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor considers the employee's ability as a leader to direct the operations, activity and performance of others
4.16 Table showing whether management creates ability to analyze problems or procedures

51

Management creates ability to analyze problems or procedures. Frequency Strongly disagree 1 Disagree 12 Agree 29 Strongly agree 12 Total 54 Percent 1.9 22.2 53.7 22.2 100.0 Valid Percent 1.9 22.2 53.7 22.2 100.0 Cumulative Percent 1.9 24.1 77.8 100.0

Valid

4.16

Chart showing whether management creates ability to analyze problems or procedures

Management creates ability to analyze problems or procedures.

60

50

40

30

20

Percent

10

0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management creates ability to analyze problems or procedures.

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 1.9% of employees strongly disagrees, 22.2% of employees disagree, 53.7% of employees agree and 22.2% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor creates ability to analyze problems or procedures, evaluate alternatives, and select the best course of action and to use logic and common sense in decision making
4.17 Table showing whether the management demonstrates the work methods to the employees

52

Management demonstrates the managements work methods Frequency Strongly disagree 3 Disagree 8 Agree 28 Strongly agree 15 Total 54 Percent 5.6 14.8 51.9 27.8 100.0 Valid Percent 5.6 14.8 51.9 27.8 100.0 Cumulative Percent 5.6 20.4 72.2 100.0

Valid

4.17

Chart showing whether the management demonstrates the work methods to the employees

Management demonstrates the managements work methods

60

50

40

30

20

Percent

10

0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management demonstrates the managements work methods

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 5.6% of employees strongly disagrees, 14.8% of employees disagree, 51.9% of employees agree and 27.8% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor demonstrates the effective management work methods and how to achieve expected results.
4.18 Table showing whether the management encourages the employees

53

Management encourages the employee Frequency Disagree 6 Agree 33 Strongly agree 15 Total 54 Percent 11.1 61.1 27.8 100.0 Valid Percent 11.1 61.1 27.8 100.0 Cumulative Percent 11.1 72.2 100.0

Valid

4.18

Chart showing whether the management encourages the employees

Management encourages the employee

70 60 50 40 30 20

Percent

10 0 Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management encourages the employee

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 0% of employees strongly disagrees, 11.1% of employees disagree, 27.861.1% of employees agree and 27.8% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor encourages the employee to produce the expected quality and quantity of assignments

54

4.19

Table showing whether the management uses appraisal methods to express their view honestly
Management uses appraisal methods to express the view honestly Frequency Strongly disagree 4 Disagree 9 Agree 31 Strongly agree 10 Total 54 Percent 7.4 16.7 57.4 18.5 100.0 Valid Percent 7.4 16.7 57.4 18.5 100.0 Cumulative Percent 7.4 24.1 81.5 100.0

Valid

4.19

Chart showing whether the management uses appraisal methods to express their view honestly

Management uses appraisal methods to express the view honestly

70 60 50 40 30 20

Percent

10 0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management uses appraisal methods to express the view honestly

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 7.4% of employees strongly disagrees, 16.7% of employees disagree, 57.4% of employees agree and 18.5% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor uses the appraisal methods to express the employees views honestly. 55

4.20

Table showing whether the management provides ability to set high class standards
Management provides ability to set high class standards. Frequency Strongly disagree 5 Disagree 7 Agree 29 Strongly agree 13 Total 54 Percent 9.3 13.0 53.7 24.1 100.0 Valid Percent 9.3 13.0 53.7 24.1 100.0 Cumulative Percent 9.3 22.2 75.9 100.0

Valid

4.20

Chart showing whether the management provides ability to set high class standards

Management provides ability to set high class standards.

60

50

40

30

20

Percent

10

0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management provides ability to set high class standards.

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 9.3% of employees strongly disagrees, 13% of employees disagree, 53.7% of employees agree and 24.1% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor provides ability to set high class standards to ensure quality of work 56

4.21

Table showing whether the management ensures the volume of work according to the accuracy of the employee.
Management ensures the volume of work according the accuracy. Frequency Strongly disagree 6 Disagree 5 Agree 29 Strongly agree 14 Total 54 Percent 11.1 9.3 53.7 25.9 100.0 Valid Percent 11.1 9.3 53.7 25.9 100.0 Cumulative Percent 11.1 20.4 74.1 100.0

Valid

4.21

Chart showing whether the management ensures the volume of work according to the accuracy of the employee.

Management ensures the volume of work according the accuracy.

60

50

40

30

20

Percent

10

0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management ensures the volume of work according the accuracy.

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 11.1% of employees strongly disagrees, 9,3% of employees disagree, 51.9% of employees agree and 25.9% of employees strongly agree that The Management / the immediate supervisor ensures the volume of work produced by the employee, is according to his or her speed, accuracy and retaining the level of output. 57

4.22

Table showing whether the management maintains safety standards to the employees
Management maintains safety standards to the employee Frequency Strongly disagree 3 Disagree 7 Agree 33 Strongly agree 11 Total 54 Percent 5.6 13.0 61.1 20.4 100.0 Valid Percent 5.6 13.0 61.1 20.4 100.0 Cumulative Percent 5.6 18.5 79.6 100.0

Valid

4.22

Chart showing whether the management maintains safety standards to the employees

Management maintains safety standards to the employee

70 60 50 40 30 20

Percent

10 0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management maintains safety standards to the employee

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 5.6% of employees strongly disagrees, 13% of employees disagree, 61.1% of employees agree and 20.4% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor maintains and observes safety and health standards to the employee.. 58

4.23

Table showing whether the management demonstrates steadiness of mind to the employees in stressful situations

Management demonstrates steadiness of mind in stressful situations. Frequency Strongly disagree 4 Disagree 5 Agree 32 Strongly agree 13 Total 54 Percent 7.4 9.3 59.3 24.1 100.0 Valid Percent 7.4 9.3 59.3 24.1 100.0 Cumulative Percent 7.4 16.7 75.9 100.0

Valid

4.23

Chart showing whether the management demonstrates steadiness of mind to the employees in stressful situations

Management demonstrates steadiness of mind in stressful situations.

70 60 50 40 30 20

Percent

10 0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management demonstrates steadiness of mind in stressful situations.

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 7.4% of employees strongly disagrees, 9.3% of employees disagree, 59.3% of employees agree and 24.1% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor demonstrates steadiness of mind and good judgment in stressful situations.. 59

4.24

Table showing whether the management demonstrates the employees how to manage time with the work
Management demonstrates how to manage time with the work. Frequency Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 7 Agree 32 Strongly agree 13 Total 54 Percent 3.7 13.0 59.3 24.1 100.0 Valid Percent 3.7 13.0 59.3 24.1 100.0 Cumulative Percent 3.7 16.7 75.9 100.0

Valid

4.24

Chart showing whether the management demonstrates the employees how to manage time with the work

Management demonstrates how to manage time with the work.

70 60 50 40 30 20

Percent

10 0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management demonstrates how to manage time with the work.

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 3.7% of employees strongly disagrees, 13% of employees disagree, 59.3% of employees agree and 24.1% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor demonstrates how to effectively manage time with the work. 60

4.25

Table showing whether the management makes the employees build work relationships

Management makes the employees build work relationships. Frequency Strongly disagree 1 Disagree 11 Agree 33 Strongly agree 9 Total 54 Percent 1.9 20.4 61.1 16.7 100.0 Valid Percent 1.9 20.4 61.1 16.7 100.0 Cumulative Percent 1.9 22.2 83.3 100.0

Valid

4.25

Chart showing whether the management makes the employees build work relationships

Management makes the employees build work relationships.

70 60 50 40 30 20

Percent

10 0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management makes the employees build work relationships.

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 1.9% of employees strongly disagrees, 20.4% of employees disagree, 61.1% of employees agree and 16.7% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor makes relationships. 61 the employee build and maintain work

4.26

Table showing whether the management demonstrates to the employees the knowledge required to perform the job

Management demonstrates knowledge required to perform the job. Frequency Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 8 Agree 37 Strongly agree 7 Total 54 Percent 3.7 14.8 68.5 13.0 100.0 Valid Percent 3.7 14.8 68.5 13.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 3.7 18.5 87.0 100.0

Valid

4.26

Chart showing whether the management demonstrates to the employees the knowledge required to perform the job

KNOWLEGE
80

60

40

20

Percent

0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

KNOWLEGE

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 3.7% of employees strongly disagrees, 14.8% of employees disagree, 68.5% of employees agree and 13% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor demonstrates technical, administrative, managerial, supervisory, or other specialized knowledge required to perform the job. 62

4.27

Table showing whether the management helps the employees to show understanding to the problems of others.

Management helps to show understanding to the problems of others. Frequency Strongly disagree 4 Disagree 6 Agree 33 Strongly agree 11 Total 54 Percent 7.4 11.1 61.1 20.4 100.0 Valid Percent 7.4 11.1 61.1 20.4 100.0 Cumulative Percent 7.4 18.5 79.6 100.0

Valid

4.27

Chart showing whether the management helps the employees to show understanding to the problems of others

Management demonstrates knowledge required to perform the job.

80

60

40

20

Percent

0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management demonstrates knowledge required to perform the job.

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 7.4% of employees strongly disagrees, 11.1% of employees disagree, 61.1% of employees agree and 20.4% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor helps the employee to show understanding and responsibility to the needs and the problems of others. 63

4.28

Table showing whether the management advices the employees to work well in a team setting
Management advices to work well in a team setting.

Valid

Frequency Strongly disagree 1 Disagree 6 Agree 31 Strongly agree 16 Total 54

Percent 1.9 11.1 57.4 29.6 100.0

Valid Percent 1.9 11.1 57.4 29.6 100.0

Cumulative Percent 1.9 13.0 70.4 100.0

4.28

Chart showing whether the management advices the employees to work well in a team setting

Management advices to work well in a team setting.

70 60 50 40 30 20

Percent

10 0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management advices to work well in a team setting.

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 1.9% of employees strongly disagrees, 11.1% of employees disagree, 57.4% of employees agree and 29.6% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor advices the employee to work well in a team setting..

64

4.29

Table showing whether the management encourages the employees to work with cooperation.
Management encourages to work with cooperation. Frequency Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 4 Agree 31 Strongly agree 17 Total 54 Percent 3.7 7.4 57.4 31.5 100.0 Valid Percent 3.7 7.4 57.4 31.5 100.0 Cumulative Percent 3.7 11.1 68.5 100.0

Valid

4.29

Chart showing whether the management encourages the employees to work with cooperation.

Management encourages to work with cooperation.

70 60 50 40 30 20

Percent

10 0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management encourages to work with cooperation.

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 3.7% of employees strongly disagrees, 7.4% of employees disagree, 57.4% of employees agree and 31.5% of employees strongly agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor encourages employee to work cooperatively with customers, co-workers and the public. 65

4.30

Table showing whether the management is concerned of employees seeking the best of materials and staff.
Management is concerned in seeking the best use of materials. Frequency Strongly disagree 4 Disagree 5 Agree 35 Strongly agree 10 Total 54 Percent 7.4 9.3 64.8 18.5 100.0 Valid Percent 7.4 9.3 64.8 18.5 100.0 Cumulative Percent 7.4 16.7 81.5 100.0

Valid

4.30

Chart showing whether the management is concerned of employees seeking the best of materials and staff.

Management is concerned in seeking the best use of materials.

70 60 50 40 30 20

Percent

10 0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

Management is concerned in seeking the best use of materials.

INFERENCE From the above chart, it shows that 7.4% of employees strongly disagrees, 9.3% of employees disagree, 64.8% of employees agree and 18.5% of employees strongly agree that The Management / the immediate supervisor is concerned of employees seeking best use of materials, and to maximize efficiency and effectiveness use of staff. 66

4.31

CORRELATION
Correlations Management Management helps to show Management makes the understandin Management advices to employees g to the coaches to work well in a build work problems of perform better OVERALL team setting. relationships. others. Pearson Correlation 1 .656** .448** .531** .208 Sig. (2-tailed) . .000 .001 .000 .132 N 54 54 54 54 54 Pearson Correlation .656** 1 .698** .670** .494** Sig. (2-tailed) .000 . .000 .000 .000 N 54 54 54 54 54 Pearson Correlation .448** .698** 1 .478** .191 Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .000 . .000 .167 N 54 54 54 54 54 .531** .000 54 .208 .132 54 .670** .000 54 .494** .000 54 .478** .000 54 .191 .167 54 1 . 54 .386** .004 54 .386** .004 54 1 . 54

Management coaches to perform better OVERALL

Management advices to work well in a team setting.

Management makes the employees build work relationships.

Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Management helps to Pearson Correlation show understanding to Sig. (2-tailed) the problems of others. N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Overall level vs. management coaches to perform better Ho: There is no correlation between overall satisfaction and management coaches better. H1: There is a correlation between overall satisfaction and management coaches better. Significance level is .000 which is lesser than .05, therefore H1 is accepted. Pearson correlation is .656 which is in between 0.3 to 0.7, so it is correlated. Overall level vs. management advices to work well in a team setting. Ho: There is no correlation between overall satisfaction and management advices to work well in a team setting. H1: There is a correlation between overall satisfaction and management advices to work well in a team setting. Significance level is .000 which is lesser than .05, therefore H1 is accepted. Pearson correlation is .698 which is in between 0.3 to 0.7, so it is correlated.

67

 Overall level vs. management makes the employees build work relationship. Ho: There is no correlation between overall satisfaction and management makes the employees build work relationship. H1: There is a correlation between overall satisfaction and management makes the employees build work relationship. Significance level is .000 which is lesser than .05, therefore H1 is accepted. Pearson correlation is .670 which is in between 0.3 to 0.7, so it is correlated.

Overall level vs. management helps to show understanding to the problem of others. Ho: There is no correlation between overall satisfaction and management helps to show understanding to the problem of others. H1: There is a correlation between overall satisfaction and management helps to show understanding to the problem of others. Significance level is .000 which is lesser than .05, therefore H1 is accepted. Pearson correlation is .494 which is in between 0.3 to 0.7, so it is correlated.

68

4.32

REGRESSION

a Coefficients

Model 1

(Constant) Management helps to show understanding to the problems of others. Management advices to work well in a team setting. Management encourages to work with cooperation. Management is concerned in seeking the best use of materials.

Unstandardized Coefficients B Std. Error .797 .192 .190 .046

Standardized Coefficients Beta

t 4.159 4.099

Sig. .000 .000

.324

.217 .134 .181

.070 .088 .066

.320 .209 .298

3.092 1.529 2.719

.003 .133 .009

a. Dependent Variable: OVERALL

The overall satisfaction vs. management helps to show understanding to the problem of others. Ho: The overall satisfaction does not depend on management helps to show understanding to the problem of others. H1: The overall satisfaction depends on management helps to show understanding to the problem of others. Ho is rejected because the significance level is .000 which is less than .05. It is correlated. The overall satisfaction vs. management advices to work well in a team setting. Ho: The overall satisfaction does not depend on management advices to work well in a team setting. H1: The overall satisfaction depends on management advices to work well in a team setting. Ho is rejected because the significance level is .003 which is less than 0.05 and so it is correlated. 69

 The overall satisfaction vs. management encourages working cooperation. Ho: The overall satisfaction does not depend on management encourages working cooperation. H1: The overall satisfaction depends on management encourages working cooperation. Ho is accepted because the significance level is .113 which is greater than 0.05 and so it is correlated. The overall satisfaction vs. management is concerned in seeking the best using of materials. Ho: The overall satisfaction does not depend on management is concerned in seeking the best using of materials. H1: The overall satisfaction depends on management is concerned in seeking the best using of materials. Ho is rejected because the significance level is .009 which is less than 0.05 and so it is correlated.

70

Chapter V

71

SUMMARY OF FINDING, RECOMMENDATION AND CONCLUSION

Chapter V

Summary of Findings, Suggestions and Conclusion:

5:1 FINDINGS

The preceding chapter dealt with analysis of data collected for the study. Based on the analysis, many interesting finding has emerged .This chapter deals with the major findings of the study In this study shows 68.5% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor is concerned about the development of the employees.

In this study shows 64.8% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor help in coaching people to perform better

In this study shows 68.5% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor delegates the work effectively and efficiently through the managers In this study shows 55.6% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor motivates the employees to achieve their goals. 72

In this study shows 61.1% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor effectively listens, receives and conveys ideas to the employees.

In this study shows 64.8% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor helps the employee to take the initiative to meet the internal and external customer needs in a timely and politely

In this study shows 64.8% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor considers the employee's ability as a leader to direct the operations, activity and performance of others In this study shows 53.7% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor creates ability to analyze problems or procedures, evaluate alternatives, and select the best course of action and to use logic and common sense in decision making In this study shows 51.9% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor demonstrates the effective management work methods and how to achieve expected results In this study shows 61.1% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor encourages the employee to produce the expected quality and quantity of assignments In this study shows 57.4% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor uses the appraisal methods to express the employees views honestly. In this study shows 53.7% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor provides ability to set high class standards to ensure quality of work In this study shows 51.9% of employees agree that The Management / the immediate supervisor ensures the volume of work produced by the employee, is according to his or her speed, accuracy and retaining the level of output. In this study shows 61.1% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor maintains and observes safety and health standards to the employee.. 73

In this study shows 59.3% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor demonstrates steadiness of mind and good judgment in stressful situations..

In this study shows 59.3% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor demonstrates how to effectively manage time with the work.

In this study shows 61.1% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor makes the employee build and maintain work relationships.

In this study shows 68.5% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor demonstrates technical, administrative, managerial, supervisory, or other specialized knowledge required to perform the job.

In this study shows 61.1% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor helps the employee to show understanding and responsibility to the needs and the problems of others

In this study shows 57.4% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor advices the employee to work well in a team setting..

In this study shows 57.4% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor encourages employee to work cooperatively with customers, co-workers and the public

In this study shows 64,8% of employees agree that the Management / the immediate supervisor is concerned of employees seeking best use of materials, and to maximize efficiency and effectiveness use of staff

74

5:2

RECOMMENDATIONS

An innovative system could not only increase the performance of the staff, but also help them to work together, with common goals and fewer obstacles. It could help people to comment on others' performance and perceived problems more freely. They can bring out things which are normally never spoken, reducing tension, improving communications, and most likely raising the employees' (or the manager's) performance considerably.

Involve your employees in the process. If they design the new performance appraisal system, they may be more dedicated to it--and both you and your employees can reap the benefits.

It is advisable for the company to have various appraisal systems because all the employees need not like the same kind of performance appraisal system.

75

 The company should listen to the employees expectations.

5:3

CONCLUSION

360-degree feedback is sometimes referred to as multi-rater appraisals, multi-source feedback or 360 degree profiling. It is essentially a process, which enables a person to receive feedback from a number of people around them. The purpose of the feedback is usually varied from organisation to organisation. 360-degree feedback not only acts as tool for organisational development but also to help an individual determine areas they need to develop. The success of the appraisal depends on the transparency and clear objectives of its need and its clear cut intimation to the employees even at the bottom level of the organisation.

76

77

BIBLIOGRAPHY
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Websites:

w w w .w ikipe dia .o r g

www.performance-appraisal.com/intro.htm www.licindia.com www.search.eps.net

Books: Aswathappa. (1995), 'Human Resource and Personnel Management', New Delhi. Niehoff, B.P. Enz, C.A. and Grover,R.A. (1990) " The Impact of Top management Actions of Employee Attitude and perceptions," Group and Organisations Studies,15,(3) P; 337-352. 78

Macgregor, D. (1972), "An Uneasy Look at Performance Appraisal Business", Harvard Review, September/October, pp. 133-138. Meyer, H.H., Emmanuel, K. and French, R.P.J. (1966), "Split Roles in Performance Appraisal" Harvard Business Review, Vol. 44, No. 3, May,/June, p. 106.

79

ANNEXURE
ANNEXURE Dear Sir / Madam, Greetings to you. I wish to introduce myself as J. Jackson Jeevaraj, Student, Karunya School of Management, Karunya University, Coimbatore. Currently I am pursuing my MBA degree. Regarding my Summer Project, I am interested to do a project under the title 360 Degree Performance Appraisal . I sincerely appreciate your favourable gesture and kind cooperation extend to me in this regard. I assure you that the information you provide will and used for my project purpose only and will be kept confidential. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Questionnaire on 360 Degree Performance Appraisal

80

at Life Insurance Corporation of India, Neyyattinkara,

Part I: ( Personal Information ) 1. Name 2. Job Cadre 3. Sex 4. Age group 5. Marital Status 6. Type of family 7. No. of family members 8. Place of residence 9. Years of job experience Part II: The following are the questions to obtain feedback from the employees ( self ) regarding the 360 degree Performance Appraisal given to them by : Peers , Subordinates, Team Members , Superiors and Customers. Respondents are requested to read through the questions and mark in the appropriate boxes of the four point rating scale. Please remember the scale as: A = Strongly Disagree B = Disagree C = Agree D= Strongly Agree Up to 2 Urban below 5 : : Male below 30 Married Female 31 50 Unmarried Joint family above 4 Semi-Urban 16 20 above 20 above 50

Nuclear family 34 Rural 6 15

81

10. The Management / the immediate supervisor is concerned about the development of the employees. A. B. C. D.

11. The Management / the immediate supervisor help in coaching people to perform better. A B. C. D.

12. The Management / the immediate supervisor delegates the work effectively and efficiently through the managers. A B. C. D.

13. The Management / the immediate supervisor motivates the employees to achieve their goals. A B. C. D.

14. The Management / the immediate supervisor effectively listens, receives and conveys ideas to the employees. A B. C. D.

15. The Management / the immediate supervisor helps the employee to take the initiative to meet the internal and external customer needs in a timely and politely. A B. C. D.

82

16. The Management / the immediate supervisor considers the employee's ability as a leader to direct the operations, activity and performance of others. A B. C. D.

17. The Management / the immediate supervisor creates ability to analyze problems or procedures, evaluate alternatives, and select the best course of action and to use logic and common sense in decision making.. A B. C. D.

18. The Management / the immediate supervisor demonstrates the effective management work methods and how to achieve expected results. A B. C. D.

19. The Management / the immediate supervisor encourages the employee to produce the expected quality and quantity of assignments. A B. C. D.

20. The Management / the immediate supervisor uses the appraisal methods to express the employees views honestly. A B. C. D.

21. The Management / the immediate supervisor provides ability to set high class standards to ensure quality of work. A B. C. D.

22. The Management / the immediate supervisor ensures the volume of work produced by the employee, is according to his or her speed, accuracy and retaining the level of output. A B. C. D. 83

23. The Management / the immediate supervisor maintains and observes safety and health standards to the employee. A B. C. D.

24. The Management / the immediate supervisor demonstrates steadiness of mind and good judgment in stressful situations. A B. C. D.

25. The Management / the immediate supervisor demonstrates how to effectively manage time with the work. A B. C. D.

26. The Management / the immediate supervisor makes the employee build and maintain work relationships. A B. C. D.

27. The Management / the immediate supervisor demonstrates technical, administrative, managerial, supervisory, or other specialized knowledge required to perform the job. A B. C. D.

28. The Management / the immediate supervisor helps the employee to show understanding and responsibility to the needs and the problems of others. A B. C. D.

29. The Management / the immediate supervisor advices the employee to work well in a team setting. A B. C. D.

84

30. The Management / the immediate supervisor encourages employee to work cooperatively with customers, co-workers and the public. A B. C. D.

31. The Management / the immediate supervisor is concerned of employees seeking best use of materials, and to maximize efficiency and effectiveness use of staff. A B. C. D.

THANK YOU FOR SPARING YOUR VALUABLE TIME.

85