Impact of Demographic Factors on Employee Engagement – a Case Study Mployee Engagement

A SYUDY ON EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT IN VASAN PUBLICATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI J Swaminathan, AVCCE ABSTRACT Employee plays a vital role in each and every organization; the interest of employee will help to achieve the organization’s objectives. Successful employee engagement strategy creates a community at a work place and not just a work force. When the employees are effectively and positively engaged with their organization, they form an emotional connection with the company. This effects their attitude towards both their colleagues and the company’s client and improves customer satisfaction and services levels. In this project work the researcher has studied about how the employee has shown their interest in the job after joining the organization. The researcher adopted descriptive research and the data is collected from the employee through convenience sampling method with the help of personally administrated questionnaire. The questionnaire contains close ended questions and the sample size is 50. This data was analyzed and classified with the help of statistical tools and the findings and suggestion are extracted from the analyzing chapter. INTRODUCTION â€Å"Engagement is the state in which individual are emotionally and intellectually committed to the organization as measured by three primary behaviors: say, stay and strive†. Success today requires a good bit more and good attendance. Employee plays a vital role in each and every organization. The interest of employee will help to achieve organizational objectives. The extent that an employee believes in the mission, purpose and values of an organization and demonstrates that commitment through their action as an employee and their attitude towards their employer and customer. Employee engagement is high when the statement and conversation held reflect natural enthusiasm for the company,its employee and the product and services provided. For the past two decades we have been trying to realize the benefit of empowerment, teamwork, recognition, people development, performance management and new leadership style. There is a big difference between putting in place initiatives that have the overall goal of increasing employee engagement and truly seeing the payoffs. And, on the other hand, one might easily attribute low engagement to persistent downsizing, which lead to an erosion of loyalty and commitment. The working definitions of engagement largely defined in terms of how a person â€Å"feels inside†. However, when we ask people if the level of engagement in the work place would be readily apparent to a visitor from the outside, their answers are invariably â€Å"yes†. Job enjoyment, believe in what one is doing, and feeling valued all contribute to observable behavior. You can observe levels of excitement and energy, you can witness people going to extra length to solve customer issues, and you can see an ethic of quality and continuous improvement. Similarly, workplace behaviors indicative of low engagement – whining, low energy, passive-aggressive behavior, lack of teamwork – can be equally visible. NEED: ? This study helps the management as a tool of powerful retention strategy. ? Engagement is about motivating employees to do their best with their full concentration ? When an employee is effectively and positively engaged with their organization, they have an emotional connection with the management. SCOPE: ? Company’s wide programmes are known with the help of employee involvement. ? To ensure the growth of an employee with the help of this goal. ? The technique which shows largely to obtain the work improvement tool adequately PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION: ? Whether engagement create positive attitudes in the mind of the employee towards the organisation and to its value. ? Whether employee’s disengagement arise due to the absence of appreciation or due to the absence of positive stroke. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 1. MR. JOHN ESTER. , BOSTON university, â€Å"employee engagement† VOL 3, PNO 342 – 349. In their employee attitude and engagement survey, measured overall engagement but also outlined that engagement has three components: Cognitive engagement – focusing very hard on work, thinking about very little else during the working day; Emotional engagement – being involved emotionally with your work; and Physical engagement – being willing to ‘go the extra mile' for your employer and work over and beyond contract . 4. Sudhesh venkatesh, HHR at TESCO HSC views employee engagement as a psychological association. The success is due to a corporate culture that support individual creativity as well as team work, paradox studies measure employee engagement term two dimensions: how employees feel (their emotion towards the company, the leadership, the work environment) and for how they intend to cut in the future(will they stay, give extra efforts). This is conducted regularly through a questionnaire and is measured on various parameters predefined by the HR team. Employee engagement needs to be measured at regular intervals in order to track its contribution to the success of the organization. . Ken scarlet, president and CEO of scarlet international: Employee engagement will make employee more contributed, more empowered, more loyal and will give the benefits such as high morale, happy environment and lower attrition rates. Organization can achieve employee bliss through employee engagement. 6. The conference board New York: author (john gibbons) published 2006: This literature review summarize s what is known on the topic of employee employment and what companies can do the foster true engagement in the work place. It provides a review of current research on their important and timely topic when workers feel mentally and emotionally connected to their jobs they are willing to apply discretionally effort to their company success. 7. Scottish Govt. publication’s 2007 (May) There is no discernable difference between the dynamics of engagement within the public sector rather difference in engagement level is result from organization characteristics, which level sectors that organizational site. 8. Human capital strategy volume-9; No. 3 August 2005: This article summarized engaged employee be gets satisfied customers. This in turn improves the profitability of the organization. HR should help in identification and reengagement of disengaged employee by launching special initiatives directed towards bringing this group of employees into the maintenance. 9. Harter, J. K. Schmidt, F. L and Hayes T. L (2001) It shows business unit level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement and business outcomes. 10. HRM Review, ICFAI University press Aug-2005 This article summarized about harnessing the power of an engaged workforce. 1. HRM Review, ICFAI University press, Feb-2008 This article summarized that through employee engagement activities the Indian information technology enabled services (ITES) and business process outsourcing (BPO) industry is maintaining and gaining increasing fraction and visibility and is expected to touch Rs. 30. 537 cr by 2010 as per NASSEM report. COMPANY PROFILE Mr. Puthur Vaithyanatha Iy er promoted Anandha Vikatan in 1926 as a monthly magazine exclusively catering to about 1500-odd yearly subscribers. In 1928,. Mr. S. S. Vasan offered to buy Anandha Vikatan for Rs. 200. From then, the magazine grew from strength to strength. No surprise that his investment into Anandha Vikatan proved wise as it eventually enabled Mr. Vasan to buy ‘Gemini studios’. Ananda vikatan is today, a household name in Tamilnadu. Since 1956, The managing director,Mr. S. Balasubaramanian has been stewarding the growth and diversification of vasan publications private limited The Vikatan groups today publishes 5 Tamil magazines with combined weekly sales of over 1 million and readership of over 10 million and were printing â€Å"The Economic Times† from Chennai for the period 1994 to 2001. PRESS: Ananda vikatan press is very well equipped with three headset, web offset machines (imported from Japan), each capable of printing four color forms. Vikatan press is also fully equipped with three flow line binding machines, two three way trimmers, cutting machines etc. on the processing side also Ananda vikatan press has kept pace with latest technology. The imported image setter, flat bed scanners and other latest process equipments add upto the production capacity of Ananda vikatan. RESEARCH DESIGN The study is designed as descriptive in nature since it attempts to obtain a complete and accurate description of situation.. Primary data for this study was collected by preparing a well structured questionnaire consisting of closed ended questions. The questionnaire was distributed to the employees and the responses were received from the employees. The method used for collecting the data is survey method. The sampling unit of the study was the various departments of Vasan publication Pvt. Ltd. Chennai. Convenience sampling method was adopted to decide the sample of 50 as permitted by the management out of 150 employees (Feb 2009 to April 2009) Statistical Tools Used For Analysis Percentage analysis, Cross tabulations, Chi-Square, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) OBJECTIVES ? To measure the level of employee engagement in the organisation. ? To identify the various factors influencing employee engagement. ? To compare the employer satisfaction & performances with the engagement of the employee. ? To study the existing practices for improving employee engagement. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION Table-4. 1: Gender of the Respondents |GENDER |Frequency |Percent | |Male |48 |96. 0 | |Female |2 |4. 0 | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: It is observed that majority of the respondents are male (96%) and only very few are female (4%). Table-4. 2: Age of the Respondents |AGE |Frequency |Percent | |Less than 26 yrs |2 |4. 0 | |26 – 30 yrs |6 |12. 0 | |31 – 35 yrs |11 |22. | |36 – 40 yrs |10 |20. 0 | |41 – 45 yrs |11 |22. 0 | |45 – 50 yrs |4 |8. 0 | |Above 50 yrs |6 |12. 0 | |Total 50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: Among the samples collected, most of the respondents are in the age group of 31 to 45 years. Only 16 percentages of the respondents are in the age group of below 30 years. However, 12 percent of the respondents have crossed 50 years of age. Table-4. 3: Experience of the Respondents |EXPERIENCE |Frequency |Percent | |Less than 6 yrs |8 |16. | |6 – 10 yrs |17 |34. 0 | |11 – 15 yrs |8 |16. 0 | |16 – 20 yrs |10 |20. 0 | |More than 20 yrs |7 |14. | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: From the above table it is observed that most of the respondents (34%) a re having 6 to 10 years of experience. 20 percent of the respondents are having 16 to 20 years of experience and 16 percent of the respondents are having less than 6 years. However, 14 percent of the respondents are having more experience (20 years and above) which is the strength of the development of vikadan organization. Table – 4. 4: Educational Qualification of the Respondents EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATION |Frequency |Percent | |Higher Secondary |13 |26. 0 | |ITI |11 |22. 0 | |Under graduation |12 |24. 0 | |Post graduation |4 |8. | |Technical |7 |14. 0 | |Non-Technical |3 |6. 0 | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: It is most of the respondents are having schooling (26%) and ITI (22%) education followed by under graduation (24%). Eight percent of the respondents are having post graduation degree and 14 percent of the respondents are having technical background. Table-4. 5: Monthly Income of the Respondents |MONTHLY INCOME |Frequency |Percent | |Rs. 5000 – Rs. 10000 |8 |16. 0 | |Rs. 10001 – Rs. 15000 |10 |20. 0 | |Rs. 15001 – Rs. 0000 |16 |32. 0 | |Rs. 20001 – Rs. 25000 |9 |18. 0 | |Rs. 25001 – Rs. 30000 |5 |10. 0 | |Rs. 30001 – Rs. 35000 |2 |4. 0 | |Total |50 |100. | [pic] INFERENCE: From the above table it is observed that 32 and 20 percent of the respondents are in Rs. 15001 to Rs. 20000 and Rs. 10000 to Rs. 15000 per month respectively. 14 percent of the respondents are earning more than Rs. 25000 per month. Only 16 percent of the respondents draw less than Rs. 5000 per month. Table-4. 6: Respondents Opinion about their Contribution towards Productivity |Productivity |Frequency |Percent | |Very High |7 |14. | |High |13 |26. 0 | |Average |6 |12. 0 | |Poor |16 |32. 0 | |Very Poor |8 |16. 0 | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: From the above table it is found that 14 percent of the respondents agree that they have contributed more for the increase in productivity, while 26 percent of the respondents opine that they have somewhat contributed for increase in productivity. However, 48 percent of the respondents agree that the show poor contribution towards productivity. Table-4. 7: Respondents Contribution towards Reducing the Waste |Wastage Reduction |Frequency |Percent | |Very High |4 |8. | |High |9 |18. 0 | |Average |6 |12. 0 | |Poor |26 |52. 0 | |Very Poor |5 |10. 0 | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: In order to know whether the employees have contributed towards reducing the waste, they were asked to give their opinion, and based on their opinion, it is observed that 62 percent of the respondents have poor and very poor contribution towards reducing the waste. Only 26 percent of the respondents have high and very high level of contribution towards reducing the waste which is shown in the bar diagram. Table-4. 8: Respondents’ Contribution towards Reducing the Costs |Cost Reduction |Frequency |Percent | |Very High |5 |10. | |High |18 |36. 0 | |Average |16 |32. 0 | |Poor |5 |10. 0 | |Very Poor |6 |12. 0 | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: Wastage reduction will lead to cost reduction. In order to know this, the respondents were asked to give their opinion and based on the results, it is identified that 46 percent of the respondents have high and very high contribution towards reducing the costs, while 32 percent of the respondents have average contribution, and 22 percent of the respondents show poor contribution towards reducing the costs. Table-4. 9: Respondents’ Opinion about Team Building Activities at Work Place |Level of Satisfaction |Frequency |Percent | |Highly Satisfied |2 |4. | |Satisfied |8 |16. 0 | |Average |18 |36. 0 | |Dissatisfied |15 |30. 0 | |Highly Dissatisfied |7 |14. 0 | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: From the above table we infer that 30 percent of the respondents opine that they are dissatisfied with the team building activities at their workplace. 30 percent of the respondents are dissatisfied while 14 percent are highly dissatisfied towards team building activities at their work place. Table-4. 10: Respondents’ Loyalty Level in the Organization |Loyalty |Frequency |Percent | |Very Good |1 |2. 0 | |Good |4 |8. | |Average |9 |18. 0 | |Lower |23 |46. 0 | |Very Lower |13 |26. 0 | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: From the above table it is observed that 46 percent of the respondents are having low loyalty level towards their organization, while 26 percent of them are having very low loyalty level. Only 10 percent have good and very good loyalty level. Table-4. 11: Respondents’ Level of Satisfaction about their Salary |Salary |Frequency |Percent | |Highly Satisfied |3 |6. 0 | |Satisfied |21 |42. 0 | |Average |12 |24. 0 | |Dissatisfied |10 |20. | |Highly Dissatisfied |4 |8. 0 | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: From the table it is noted that 42 percent of the respondents are satisfied with their salary and 6 percent of the respondents are highly satisfied. 24 percent of the respondents showing average satisfaction and 28 percent of the respondents depict dissatisfaction towards their salary. Table-4. 12: Respondents’ Level of Satisfaction about their Working Hours Working Hours |Frequency |Percent | |Strongly Agree |3 |6. 0 | |Agree |20 |40. 0 | |Neutral |14 |28. 0 | |Disagree |11 |22. 0 | |Strongly Disagree |2 |4. | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: From the table it is noted that 40 percent respondents’ have agreed that they are satisfied with the ir working hours. 28 percent of the respondents show neutral opinion while 22 percent show disagreement towards their working hours. Table-4. 13: Respondents Involvement in Problem Solving |Involvement |Frequency |Percent | |Increased |18 |36. | |No Change |20 |40. 0 | |Decreased |12 |24. 0 | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: From the above table it is noted that 40 percent of the respondents show that their involvement level do not change in the past three years, and 36 percent of the respondents opine that their involvement level has been changed for the past 3 years. Only 24 percent of the respondents argued that their involvement level decreased in the past 3 years. Table-4. 14: Respondents’ Feeling of Motivation |Motivation |Frequency |Percent | |Large Extent |2 |4. 0 | |Reasonable Extent |18 |36. 0 | |Average |11 |22. 0 | |Certain |15 |30. | |Not at all |4 |8. 0 | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: From the above table it is noted that 36 percent of the employees felt that their motivation has increased to a reasonable extent, 22 percent of the respondents argue that it has an average increase, while 30 percent of the respondents opine that the motivation has shown a below average increase. However, 8 percent of the respondents argue that their motivation has not at all increased. Table-4. 15: Respondents’ Opinion about Team Spirit in their Working Environment |Team Spirit |Frequency |Percent | |Good |8 |16. 0 | |Average |13 |26. 0 | |Lower |20 |40. | |Very Lower |9 |18. 0 | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: Form the above table it is noted that 58 percent of the respondents have lower and very lower level of team spirit, while 16 percent of the respondents are having good team spirit, which is the indication of success of the organization. Table-4. 16: Respondents’ Level of Satisfaction about their Morale in the Organization Level of Satisfaction |Frequency |Percent | |Satisfied |11 |22. 0 | |Average |14 |28. 0 | |Dissatisfied |22 |44. 0 | |Highly Dissatisfied |3 |6. 0 | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: From the above table it is found that only 22 percent of the respondents are satisfied while 6 percent of the respondents are highly dissatisfied with the morale of the organization. Table-4. 17: Employees’ Influence over Quality in the Organization |Level of Influence |Frequency |Percent | |Highly Influence |3 |6. 0 | |Influence |13 |26. 0 | |Somewhat Influence |28 |56. | |No Influence |6 |12. 0 | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: From the above table it is observed that 56 percent of the respondents opine that employees have somewhat influence over quality, while 26 percent of the respondents agree that the employees have influence over quality. However, 12 percent of the respondents report that the employees do not have any influence on the quality. Table-4. 18: Respondents’ Opinion about the Recognition as Individuals |Opinion |Frequency |Percent | |Always |7 |14. 0 | |Sometimes |16 |32. 0 | |Rarely |8 |16. 0 | |Never |14 |28. | |No Idea |5 |10. 0 | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: From the above table it is inferred that 14 percent of the respondents agree that they always get recognition, while 32 percent of the respondents sometimes get recognition. It could be noted that 28 percent of the respondents agree that individuals never get any recognition from the organization. Table-4. 9: Respondents’ level of Importance towards put forwarding the suggestions |Level of Importance |Frequency |Percent | |Importance |6 |12. 0 | |Fairly Importance |8 |16. 0 | |Somewhat Importance |17 |34. 0 | |No Importance |19 |38. | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: On observing the table, it could be understood that 38 percent of the respondents show no importance while put forwarding the suggestions to management, whereas 3 4 percent of the respondents show somewhat importance, while 12 percent of the respondents agree that it is important to put forwarding suggestions to management. Table-4. 20: Respondents’ Level of Satisfaction about Balancing of Family life and Work life Level of Satisfaction |Frequency |Percent | |Highly Satisfied |2 |4. 0 | |Satisfied |16 |32. 0 | |Moderately Satisfied |9 |18. 0 | |Dissatisfied |18 |36. 0 | |Highly Dissatisfied |5 |10. | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE: From the above table it is inferred that the respondents are in both the categories. That is, 46 percent of the respondents are dissatisfied and remaining 56 percent of the respondents are satisfied in Balancing their Family Life and Work Life Table-4. 21: Respondents’ Opinion about Training Programme organized by the Company |Level of Satisfaction |Frequency |Percent | |Highly Satisfied |1 |2. | |Satisfied |5 |10. 0 | |Moderately Satisfied |8 |16. 0 | |Dissatisfied |28 |56. 0 | |Highly Dissatis fied |8 |16. 0 | |Total |50 |100. 0 | [pic] INFERENCE From the above table it is observed that most of the respondents opine that they were not satisfied by the training programme conducted by the organization. However, 12 percent of the employees are satisfied while 16 percent of the employees are moderately satisfied. On seeing the Bar diagram, it is observed that on total 72 percent of the employee are not satisfied with the training programme. Table-4. 22: Relationship between Age and Contribution towards Productivity Ho: There is no relationship between age and productivity H1: There is some relationship between age and productivity Cross Tabulation |Age |Productivity |Total | | |Poor |Neutral |High | | |Below 30 years |3 |1 |4 |8 | |30 – 45 years |13 |5 |14 |32 | |Above 45 years |4 | |6 |10 | |Total |20 |6 |24 |50 | Chi-Square Tests | |Value |df |Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |Pearson Chi-Square |11. 995 |4 |. 037 | |Likelihood Ratio |13. 146 |4 |. 034 | |Linear-by-Linear Association |8. 044 |1 |. 34 | |N of Valid Cases |50 | | | Correlation | | |Value |Asymp. Std. Error |Approx. T |Approx. Sig. | |Interval by Interval |Pearson's R |. 103 |. 121 |. 720 |0. 475 | |Ordinal by Ordinal |Spearman Correlation |. 085 |. 29 |. 594 |0. 555 | |N of Valid Cases | |50 | | | | INFERENCE: From the above analysis it is found that though there is a relationship between age and productivity, the influence of age on productivity is meager. INTERPRETATION: Since the table value is found to be higher than the calculated value, the null hypothesis is rejected. Alternate hypothesis has been accepted which means that there is some relationship between age and productivity. From correlation table, it is identified that the Pearson R vale is 0. 103 which is positive and hence there is a positive relationship between age and productivity. Table-4. 23: Relationship between Age and Contribution towards Wastage Reduction Ho: There is no relationship between age and wastage Reduction H1: There is some relationship between age and Wastage Reduction Cross Tabulation Age |Wastage Reduction |Total | | |Poor |Neutral |High | | |Below 30 years |4 | |4 |8 | |30 – 45 years |7 |3 |22 |32 | |Above 45 years |2 |3 |5 |10 | |Total |13 |6 |31 |50 | Chi-Square Tests | |Value |df |Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |Pearson Chi-Square |16. 617 |4 |. 015 | |Likelihood Ratio |16. 455 |4 |. 016 | |Linear-by-Linear Association |8. 379 |1 |. 053 | |N of Valid Cases |50 | | | Correlation | | |Value |Asymp. Std. Error |Approx. T |Approx. Sig. | |Interval by Interval|Pearson's R |. 022 |. 145 |. 154 |. 879 | |Ordinal by Ordinal |Spearman Correlation|. 029 |. 146 |. 198 |. 844 | |N of Valid Cases | |50 | | | | INFERENCE: From the above analysis it is found that though there is a relationship between age and wastage reduction, the influence of age on wastage reduction is meagre.. INTERPRETATION: Since the table value is found to be higher than the calculated value, the null hypothesis is rejected. Alternate hypothesis has been accepted which means that there is some relationship between age and wastage reduction From correlation table it is observed that the Pearson correlation value is 0. 022 which is positive and hence, there is a positive relationship between age and contribution towards wastages. . Table-4. 24: Relationship between Age and Contribution towards Cost Reduction Ho: There is no relationship between age and Cost Reduction H1: There is some relationship between age and Cost Reduction Cross Tabulation |Age |Cost Reduction |Total | | |Poor |Neutral |High | | |Below 30 years |5 |2 |1 |8 | |30 – 45 years |18 |10 |4 |32 | |Above 45 years | |4 |6 |10 | |Total |23 |16 |11 |50 | Chi-Square Tests | |Value |df |Asymp. Sig. | | | | |(2-sided) | |Pearson Chi-Square |14. 337 |4 |. 006 | |Likelihood Ratio |17. 017 |4 |. 002 | |Linear-by-Linear Association |9. 650 |1 |. 002 | |N of Valid Cases |50 | | | Correlation | | |Value |Asymp. Std. Error |Approx. T |Approx. Sig. | |Interval by Interval|Pearson's R |. 451 |. 117 |3. 502 |. 001 | |Ordinal by Ordinal |Spearman Correlation|. 344 |. 139 |2. 539 |. 014 | |N of Valid Cases | |50 | | | | INFERENCE: From the above analysis it is found that though there is a relationship between age and cost reduction, the influence of age on cost reduction is plentiful. INTERPRETATION: Since the table value is found to be higher than the calculated value, the null hypothesis is rejected, the alternate hypothesis has been accepted which means that there is some relationship between age and cost reduction. Pearson R value (0. 451) in Correlation table proves that there is positive relationship between age and contribution towards cost reduction. Table-4. 25: Relationship between Age and Team Building Ho: There is no relationship between age and Team Building H1: There is some relationship between age and Team Building Cross Tabulation |Age |Team Building |Total | | |Dissatisfied |Moderate |Satisfied | | |Below 30 years |1 |3 |4 |8 | |30 – 45 years |6 |13 |13 |32 | |Above 45 years |3 |2 |5 |10 | |Total |10 |18 |22 |50 | Chi-Square Tests | |Value |Df |Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |Pearson Chi-Square |1. 886 |4 |. 757 | |Likelihood Ratio |1. 981 |4 |. 739 | |Linear-by-Linear Association |. 206 |1 |. 650 | |N of Valid Cases |50 | | | INFERENCE: From the above analysis it is found that there is no relationship between age and team building activity in the work place. INTERPRETATION: Since the table value is found to be lesser than the calculated value, the null hypothesis is accepted; there is no relationship between age and their opinion about the team building activities adopted in their work place. Table-4. 26: Relationship between Age and Loyalty Ho: There is no relationship between age and Loyalty Level of employees H1: There is relationship between age and Loyalty Level of Employees Cross Tabulation |Age |Loyalty Level |Total | | |Poor |Average |Good | | |Below 30 years |1 |1 |6 |8 | |30 – 45 years |3 |6 |23 |32 | |Above 45 years |1 |2 |7 |10 | |Total |5 |9 |36 |50 | Chi-Square Tests | |Value |df |Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |Pearson Chi-Square |16. 245 |4 |. 033 | |Likelihood Ratio |15. 257 |4 |. 032 | |Linear-by-Linear Association |8. 007 |1 |. 032 | |N of Valid Cases |50 | | | Correlation | | |Value |Asymp. Std. Error |Approx. T |Approx. Sig. | |Interval by Interval|Pearson's R |. 053 |. 165 |. 366 |. 716 | |Ordinal by Ordinal |Spearman Correlation|. 125 |. 154 |. 872 |. 388 | |N of Valid Cases | |50 | | | | INFERENCE: From the above analysis it is found that though there is a relationship etween age and loyalty level, the influence of age on loyalty level is meagre. INTERPRETATION: Since the table value is found to be higher than the calculated value, the null hypothesis is rejected. Alternate hypothesis has been accepted which means that there exists some relationship between age and employees’ loyalty level in the organization. Correlation table shows that the Pearson R value is 0. 053 which is positive and hence there is a positive relationship between age and loyalty. Table-4. 27: Relationship between Age and Morale Ho: There is no relationship between age and Morale H1: There is some relationship between age and Morale Cross Tabulation |Age |Morale |Total | | |Dissatisfied |Average |Satisfied | | |Below 30 years | |4 |4 |8 | |30 – 45 years |8 |2 |22 |32 | |Above 45 years |4 |2 |4 |10 | |Total |12 |8 |30 |50 | Chi-Square Tests | |Value |df|Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |Pearson Chi-Square |7. 896 |4 |. 042 | |Likelihood Ratio |9. 386 |4 |. 025 | |Linear-by-Linear Association |6. 559 |1 |. 045 | |N of Valid Cases |50 | | | Correlation | | |Value |Asymp. Std. Error |Approx. T |Approx. Sig. | |Interval by Interval |Pearson's R |. 107 |. 126 |. 744 |0. 461 | |Ordinal by Ordinal |Spearman Correlation |. 080 |. 133 |. 555 |0. 582 | |N of Valid Cases | |50 | | | | INFERENCE: From the above analysis it is found that though there is a relationship between age and morale, the influence of age on morale is meagre. INTERPRETATION: Since the table value is found to be higher than the calculated value, the null hypothesis is rejected. Alternate hypothesis has been accepted which means that there is some relationship between age and morale. From correlation table, it is identified that the Pearson R vale is 0. 103 which is positive and hence there is a positive relationship between age and morale. Table-4. 28: Relationship between Age and Salary Ho: There is no relationship between age and Salary H1: There is some relationship between age and Salary Cross Tabulation |Age |Salary |Total | | |Dissatisfied |Moderate |Satisfied | | |Below 30 years |5 |3 | |8 | |30 – 45 years |13 |8 |11 |32 | |Above 45 years |6 |1 |3 |10 | |Total |24 |12 |14 |50 | Chi-Square Tests | |Value |Df |Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |Pearson Chi-Square |5. 169 |4 |. 270 | |Likelihood Ratio |7. 487 |4 |. 112 | |Linear-by-Linear Association |. 437 |1 |. 508 | |N of Valid Cases |50 | | | INFERENCE: From the above analysis it is found that there is no relationship between age and their level of satisfaction of their salary. INTERPRETATION: Since the table value is found to be lesser than the calculated value, the null hypothesis is accepted; there is no relationship between age and their level of satisfaction of their salary. Table-4. 29: Relationship between Age and Working Hours Ho: There is no relationship between age and Working hours H1: There is some relationship between age and Working hours Cross Tabulation |Age |Working Hours |Total | | |Disagree |Neutral |Agree | | |Below 30 years |5 |3 | |8 | |30 – 45 years |13 |6 |13 |32 | |Above 45 years |5 |5 | |10 | |Total |23 |14 |13 |50 | Chi-Square Tests | |Value |Df |Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |Pearson Chi-Square |10. 986 |4 |. 027 | |Likelihood Ratio |15. 011 |4 |. 005 | |Linear-by-Linear Association |. 13 |1 |. 910 | |N of Valid Cases |50 | | | Correlation | | |Value |Asymp. Std. Error |Approx. T |Approx. Sig. | |Interval by Interval|Pearson's R |-. 165 |. 119 |-1. 158 |. 252 | |Ordinal by Ordinal |Spearman Correlation|-. 158 |. 134 |-1. 112 |. 272 | |N of Valid Cases | |50 | | | | INFERENCE: From the above analysis it is found that though there is a relationship between age and working hours, the influence of age on working hours is meagre. INTERPRETATION: Since the table value is found to be higher than the calculated value, the null hypothesis is rejected. Hence, alternate hypothesis has been accepted which means that there exists some negative relationship between age and working hours set by the organization. Pearson correlation value of -0. 165 denotes that there exists negative relationship between age and working hours set by the management. Table-4. 31: Relationship between Age and Involvement Ho: There is no relationship between age and Involvement H1: There is some relationship between age and Involvement Cross Tabulation |Age |Involvement |Total | | |Decreased |No Change |Increased | | |Below 30 years |4 |2 |2 |8 | |30 – 45 years |11 |13 |8 |32 | |Above 45 years |3 |5 |2 |10 | |Total |18 |20 |12 |50 | Chi-Square Tests | |Value |df|Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |Pearson Chi-Square |1. 345 |4 |. 854 | |Likelihood Ratio |1. 360 |4 |. 851 | |Linear-by-Linear Association |. 144 |1 |. 05 | |N of Valid Cases |50 | | | INFERENCE: From the above analysis it is found that there is no relationship between age and involvement in problem solving. INTERPRETATION: Since the table value is found to be lesser than the calculated value, the null hypothesis is accepted; there is no relationship between age and involvement in problem solving. Table-4. 32: Relationship between Experience and Contribution towards Productivity Ho: There is no relationship between Experience and productivity H1: There is some relationship between Experience and productivity Cross tabulation |Experience |Productivity |Total | | |Poor |Neutral |High | | |Less than 10 years |9 |4 |12 |25 | |10 to 20 years |9 |2 |7 |18 | |Above 20 years |2 | |5 |7 | |Total |20 |6 |24 |50 | Chi-Square Tests | |Value |Df |Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |Pearson Chi-Square |13. 076 |4 |. 045 | |Likelihood Ratio |12. 796 |4 |. 034 | |Linear-by-Linear Association |8. 091 |1 |. 063 | |N of Valid Cases |50 | | | Correlation | | |Value |Asymp. Std. Error |Approx. T |Approx. Sig. | |Interval by Interval|Pearson's R |-. 033 |. 126 |-. 231 |. 818 | |Ordinal by Ordinal |Spearman Correlation|-. 038 |. 129 |-. 265 |. 792 | |N of Valid Cases | |50 | | | | INFERENCE: From the above analysis it is found that though there is a relationship between experience and contribution towards productivity. INTERPRETATION: Since the table value is found to be higher than the calculated value, the null hypothesis is rejected. Hence, alternate hypothesis has been accepted which means that there is negative relationship between experience and their contribution towards productivity. On observing the correlation table, the Pearson R value of -0. 033 denotes a negative relationship between experience and productivity. Table-4. 33 :Relationship between Experience and Contribution towards Wastage Reduction Ho: There is no relationship between Experience and wastage reduction H1: There is some relationship between experience and wastage reduction Cross Tabulation |Experience |Wastage Reduction |Total | | |Poor |Neutral |High | | |Less than 10 years |8 |2 |15 |25 | |10 to 20 years |4 |2 |12 |18 | |Above 20 years |1 |2 |4 |7 | |Total |13 |6 |31 |50 | Chi-Square Tests | |Value |Df |Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |Pearson Chi-Square |12. 867 |4 |. 038 | |Likelihood Ratio |12. 514 |4 |. 042 | |Linear-by-Linear Association |7. 315 |1 |. 055 | |N of Valid Cases |50 | | | Correlation | | |Value |Asymp. Std. Error |Approx. T |Approx. Sig. | |Interval by Interval|Pearson's R |-. 019 |. 153 |-. 133 |. 894 | |Ordinal by Ordinal |Spearman Correlation|-. 019 |. 155 |-. 135 |. 893 | |N of Valid Cases | |50 | | | | INFERENCE: From the above analysis it is found that though there is a relationship between experience and wastage reduction. Hence the influence of experience on wastage reduction is meagre. INTERPRETATION: Since the table value is found to be higher than the calculated value, the null hypothesis is rejected. Hence, alternate hypothesis has been accepted which means that there exists some negative relationship between experience and wastage reduction. Pearson correlation value of -0. 165 denotes that there exists negative relationship between experience and wastage reduction Table-4. 34: Relationship between Experience and Contribution towards Cost Reduction Ho: There is no relationship between Experience and Cost reduction H1: There is some relationship between experience and cost reduction Cross Tabulation |Experience |Cost Reduction |Total | | Poor |Neutral |High | | |Less than 10 years |12 |9 |4 |25 | |10 to 20 years |11 |6 |1 |18 | |Above 20 years | |1 |6 |7 | |Total |23 |16 |11 |50 | Chi-Square Tests | |Value |df|Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |Pearson Chi-Square |20. 495 |4 |. 000 | |Likelihood Ratio |19. 287 |4 |. 001 | |Linear-by-Linear Association |5. 781 |1 |. 016 | |N of Valid Case s |50 | | | Correlation | | |Value |Asymp. Std. Error |Approx. T |Approx. Sig. | |Interval by Interval|Pearson's R |. 418 |. 133 |3. 186 |. 003 | |Ordinal by Ordinal |Spearman Correlation|. 301 |. 151 |2. 185 |. 034 | |N of Valid Cases | |50 | | | | INFERENCE: From the above analysis it is found that though there is a relationship between experience and contribution on cost reduction. Hence the influence of experience on cost reduction is plentiful. INTERPRETATION: Since the table value is found to be higher than the calculated value, the null hypothesis is rejected. Alternate hypothesis has been accepted which means that there is positive relationship between experience and their contribution towards cost reduction. The Pearson R value of 0. 418 denotes that there is a positive relationship between experience and contribution towards cost reduction. Table-4. 34: Relationship between Experience and Team Building Ho: There is no relationship between Experience and Team Building H1: There is some relationship between experience and Team Building Cross Tabulation |Experience |Team Building |Total | | |Dissatisfied |Moderate |Satisfied | | |Less than 10 years |2 |10 |13 |25 | |10 to 20 years |6 |7 |5 |18 | |Above 20 years |2 |1 |4 |7 | |Total |10 |18 |22 |50 | Chi-Square Tests | |Value |df|Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |Pearson Chi-Square |6. 442 |4 |. 168 | |Likelihood Ratio |7. 066 |4 |. 132 | |Linear-by-Linear Association |1. 444 |1 |. 229 | |N of Valid Cases |50 | | | INFERENCE: From the above analysis it is found that is, there is no relationship between employees’ experience and their opinion about team building activities involved in their work place. INTERPRETATION: Since the table value is found to be lesser than the calculated value, the null hypothesis is accepted; there is no relationship between experience and team building activities. Table-4. 35: Relationship between Experience and Loyalty Ho: There is no relationship between Experience and Loyalty Level H1: There is some relationship between experience and Loyalty Level Cross Tabulation |Experience |Loyalty Level |Total | | Poor |Average |Good | | |Less than 10 years |2 |5 |18 |25 | |10 to 20 years |2 |3 |13 |18 | |Above 20 years |1 |1 |5 |7 | |Total |5 |9 |36 |50 | Chi-Square Tests | |Value |df|Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |Pearson Chi-Square |12. 378 |4 |. 040 | |Likelihood Ratio |12. 372 |4 |. 051 | |Linear-by-Linear Association |9. 062 |1 |. 032 | |N of Valid Cases |50 | | | Correlation | | |Value |Asymp. Std. Error |Approx. T |Approx. Sig. | |Interval by Interval|Pearson's R |-. 418 |. 133 |-3. 186 |. 003 | |Ordinal by Ordinal |Spearman Correlation|-. 301 |. 151 |-2. 185 |. 034 | |N of Valid Cases | |50 | | | | INFERENCE: From the above analysis it is found that though there is a relationship between experience and their loyalty level in the organization. Hence the influence of experience on loyalty level is meagre. INTERPRETATION: Since the table value is found to be higher than the calculated value, the null hypothesis is rejected. Alternate hypothesis has been accepted which means that there is negative relationship between experience and their loyalty level in the organization. Correlation table shows the Pearson R value as -0. 418 which is negative and hence there is negative relationship between experience and loyalty. Table-4. 36; Relationship between Experience and Morale Ho: There is no relationship between Experience and Morale H1: There is some relationship between experience and Morale Cross Tabulation |Experience |Morale |Total | | |Dissatisfied |Average |Satisfied | | |Less than 10 years |5 |5 |15 |25 | |10 to 20 years |6 |2 |10 |18 | |Above 20 years |1 |1 |5 |7 | |Total |12 |8 |30 |50 | Chi-Square Tests | |Value |df|Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |Pearson Chi-Square |11. 634 |4 |. 038 | |Likelihood Ratio |13. 829 |4 |. 030 | |Linear-by-Linear Association |8. 939 |1 |. 33 | |N of Valid Cases |50 | | | Correlation | | |Value |Asymp. Std. Error |Approx. T |Approx. Sig. | |Interval by Interval|Pearson's R |. 138 |. 142 |. 368 |. 338 | |Ordinal by Ordinal |Spearman Correlation|. 144 |. 142 |1. 008 |. 319 | |N of Valid Cases | |50 | | | | INFERENCE: From the above analysis it is found that though there is a relationship between experience and morale. Hence the influence of experience on morale is plentiful. INTERPRETATION: Since the table value is found to be higher than the calculated value, the null hypothesis is rejected. Alternate hypothesis has been accepted which means that there is a relationship between experience and their level of satisfaction towards morale. The Pearson R value of 0. 138 denotes that the relationship between experience and morale is positive. That is, employees who have more experience are satisfied toward morale. Table-4. 37: Relationship between Experience and Salary Ho: There is no relationship between Experience and salary H1: There is some relationship between experien