47243306-Quality-of-Work-Life-Project-Report | Action (Philosophy) | Quality Of Life

A STUDY ON “QUALITY OF WORK LIFE” AT LUCAS- TVS, PADI

TABLE OF CONTENT
CHAPTERS NO 1 TOPIC List of Tables List of Charts INTRODUCTION 1.1 Company Profile 1.2 Review of literature 1.3 Objective of the study 1.4 Scope of the study 1.5 Limitation of the study RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 2.1 Research Design 2.2 Sampling Technique 2.3 Sample Size 2.4 Data Collection Method 2.5 Tools used for analysis RESULT AND INTERPRETATION 3.1 Data analysis and Interpretation 3.2 Findings 3.3 Suggestions 3.4 Conclusion BIBILIOGRAPHY ANNEXURE PAGE NO

2

3

ABSTRACT

The research is on the basis of A STUDY ON “QUALITY OF WORK LIFE” AT
LUCAS-TVS, PADI. Due to changes in technology and to meet various demands of the

employees and to withstand the place in the Global market the company has to focus on

employees satisfaction on major areas like job security, job satisfaction, medical facilities, canteen facilities, rewards, ESI, etc.,.

Surveys are an effective way of knowing about employees’ quality of work life in the organization. While exit interviews are generally used, they are a delayed way of knowing the quality of work life.

The study was based on the descriptive research design. The sampling design being used here is Simple Random Sampling. The sample size 46 has been used

Thus this report seeks to utilize primary research, through structured questionnaires and secondary method involves data collection through magazines and websites.

The tools being used for analysis and interpretation are Chi-Square test and five point liker scales.

The Suggestion made by the employees where mostly implemented whenever they were applicable.

LIST OF TABLES Table no PARTICULARS Page no

3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 3.1.4 3.1.5 3.1.6 3.1.7 3.1.8 3.1.9

Satisfaction of salary package Satisfaction of current job Satisfaction of casual leave with pay Satisfaction with medical facilities Satisfaction with bonus Satisfaction with canteen facilities Satisfaction of ESI & PF Satisfaction with health & safety working condition Satisfaction of job security

3.1.10 Satisfaction of promotion policy 3.1.11 Satisfaction of quality of work life 3.1.12 Proper communication when changes occur 3.1.13 Cordial relationship among employees 3.1.14 Satisfaction of training methodology 3.1.15 Satisfaction of Performance appraisal 3.1.16 Satisfaction of grievance redressel 3.1.17 Reward recognition 3.1.18 Satisfaction of Career development 3.1.19 Freedom to do their own work

LIST OF CHARTS Chart no 3.1.1 3.1.2 PARTICULARS Satisfaction of salary package Satisfaction of current job Page no

1.1.6 3.1. This approach motivates people by satisfying not only their economic needs but also their social and psychological ones. To satisfy the new generation workforce.1. The QWL approach considers people as an 'asset' to the organization rather than as 'costs'.8 3.3.1.11 3.14 3.1. Further.12 3. organizations need to concentrate on job designs and organization of work. .1.18 3. It believes that people perform better when they are allowed to participate in managing their work and make decisions.1.9 3.10 3.1.5 3.1.1.13 3.1.1.4 3.19 Satisfaction Satisfaction Satisfaction Satisfaction Satisfaction Satisfaction of casual leave with pay with medical facilities with bonus with canteen facilities of ESI & PF with health & safety working condition Satisfaction of job security Satisfaction of promotion policy Satisfaction of quality of work life Proper communication when changes occur Cordial relationship among employees Satisfaction of training methodology Satisfaction of Performance appraisal Satisfaction of grievance redressel Reward recognition Satisfaction of Career development Freedom to do their own work CHAPTER-1 INTRODUCTION Quality of Work Life: Quality of work life (QWL) is viewed as an alternative to the control approach of managing people.17 3.1.16 3.1.7 3.3 3. today's workforce is realizing the importance of relationships and is trying to strike a balance between career and personal lives.1.15 3.1.

satisfied. and. telecommuting etc. and the broader economic or cultural climate. for many years. and committed workforce which aims to achieve organizational objectives. In this process. organizations are coming up with new and innovative ideas to improve the quality of work and quality of work life of every individual in the organization. Quality of working life. It is argued that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts as regards Quality of working Life. more recently. it will be argued here that the specific attention to work-related aspects of quality of life is valid. Organizations are enjoying the fruits of implementing QWL programs in the form of increased productivity. so that action can be taken which will enhance an individual’s performance.Successful organizations support and provide facilities to their people to help them to balance the scales. Technological advances further help organizations to implement these programs successfully. if targeted. more complex models of an individuals experience in the workplace often appear to be set aside in an endeavour to simplify the process of trying to measuring “stress” or some similarly apparently discrete entity. are being adopted by these organizations. In this context. be they for the individual or the organisation. alternative work schedules. A clearer understanding of the inter-relationship of the various facets of quality of working life offers the opportunity for improved analysis of cause and effect . and an efficient. however. Somewhere in all this. and. the precise nature of the relationship between these concepts has still been little explored. A review of the literature reveals relatively little on quality of working life. Stress at work is often considered in isolation. job satisfaction may be assessed. whereupon the home-work context is considered. However. the failure to attend to the bigger picture may lead to the failure of interventions which tackle only one aspect. and other factors. for example. Quality of working life has been differentiated from the broader concept of Quality of Life. might be seen as relevant. that the consideration of the bigger. effective action is to be taken to address quality of working life or any of it’s sub-components in such a way as to produce real benefits. more complex picture is essential. such as an individual’s personal characteristics.. therefore. this may be overly simplistic. there is often an awareness of the greater context. To some degree. remains relatively unexplored and unexplained. It may be. Alternatively. However. writers differ in their views on its’ core constituents. The future work world will also have more women entrepreneurs and they will encourage and adopt QWL programs.(1990)(3) concluded that quality of work performance is affected by Quality of Life as well as Quality of working life. Whilst there has. an interest has arisen into the broader concepts of stress and subjective well-being (2). Where quality of working life has been explored. Various programs like flex time. compressed work weeks. wherein it is assessed on the basis that attention to an individual’s stress management skills or the sources of stress will prove to provide a good enough basis for effective intervention. been much research into job satisfaction (1). Whilst Quality of Life has been more widely studied (4). Quality of Working Life is a term that had been used to describe the broader job-related experience an individual has. as Elizur and Shye. subjective well-being is seen as drawing upon both work and non-work aspects of life.

for example. REVIEW OF LITERATURE Definition .1. may offer opportunity for more cost-effective interventions in the workplace.2. may otherwise prove a hopeless task for employers pressured to take action to meet governmental requirements. 1. such as job satisfaction and stress.in the workplace…. The effective targeting of stress reduction. COMPANY PROFILE 1.This consideration of Quality of working Life as the greater context for various factors in the workplace.

psychological well being. whilst some authors have emphasised the workplace aspects in Quality of working life. Thus. intrinsic job motivation and job satisfaction. Selected models are reviewed below. as researchers have tried to tease out the important influences on Quality of working life in the workplace. but significant association with self-rated anxiety. job stress. and perceived intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction. Skill variety.Various authors and researchers have proposed models of Quality of working life which include a wide range of factors. social relevance of the work or product. Autonomy and Feedback. In contrast to such theory based models. life satisfaction. happiness. perceived intrinsic job characteristics. Hackman and Oldham (1976)(5) drew attention to what they described as psychological growth needs as relevant to the consideration of Quality of working life. in an investigation of Quality of working life. individual power. such as those between work involvement and job satisfaction. Taylor (1979)(6) more pragmatically identified the essential components of Quality of working life as. hours and working conditions. self development. fairness and equity. Mirvis and Lawler (1984)(8) suggested that Quality of working life was associated with satisfaction with wages. and self-rated anxiety. . suggesting that this facet should be investigated as part of the concept of quality of working life. however. equitable wages. use of one’s present skills. found evidence for a moderate association between total job satisfaction and total life satisfaction and happiness. with a less strong. considered a range of apparently relevant factors. Task Identity. social support. work role conflict. and broader concepts of happiness and life satisfaction. hours and working conditions. Several such needs were identified. including. Baba and Jamal (1991)(9) listed what they described as typical indicators of quality of working life. a meaningful future at work. intrinsic job motivation. describing the “basic elements of a good quality of work life” as. and the intrinsic job notions of the nature of the work itself. Warr et al. They suggested that such needs have to be addressed if employees are to experience high quality of working life. Task significance. effect on extra work activities. safe work environment. Warr and colleagues (1979)(7). organisational commitment and turn-over intentions. including work involvement. Taylor suggested that relevant Quality of working life concepts may vary according to organisation and employee group. work role overload. equal employment opportunities and opportunities for advancement. Baba and Jamal also explored routinisation of job content. higher order need strength. basic extrinsic job factors of wages. Factors more obviously and directly affecting work have. He suggested that a number of other aspects could be added. employee participation in the management. work role ambiguity. job satisfaction. In particular. others have identified the relevance of personality factors. served as the main focus of attention. job involvement. They discussed a range of correlations derived from their work. including: job satisfaction.

Resident aggression. 2001 (11) and Warr. Further. that is. Need satisfaction based on Work environment. or need to be specific to each work setting. The distinction made between job satisfaction and dissatisfaction in quality of working life reflects the influence of job satisfaction theories. Sirgy. the work itself. job content. Efraty. including: Poor working environments. 1966) (1). rather than simply reflecting their “real world”. an individual’s perception can be affected by relative comparison – am I paid as much as that person .Some have argued that quality of working life might vary between groups of workers. with opinions varying as to whether such definitions and explanations can be both global. responsibility and advancement. Of these latter. covering Health & safety. for example. Lack of recognition. Unable to deliver quality of care preferred. Lack of involvement in decision making. 1979)(7). whilst achievement can be the greatest source of extreme satisfaction. aspirations. Balance of work and family. intermediate clerical. Need satisfaction based on Supervisory behaviour. (2001)(11) suggested that the key factors in quality of working life are: Need satisfaction based on job requirements. authors differ in their views on the core constituents of Quality of Working Life (e. . (2003)(12) used 16 questions to examine quality of working life. Ellis and Pompli (2002)(10) identified a number of factors contributing to job dissatisfaction and quality of working life in nurses. salary. For example. sales and service workers. Poor relationships with supervisor/peers. and outcomes stemming from participation in the workplace. and distinguished between causes of dissatisfaction in professionals. Knowledge and Aesthetics. It has been suggested that Motivator factors are intrinsic to the job. activities. Social. indicating that different concerns might have to be addressed for different groups. with the individual’s current state (Lawler and Porter. Herzberg at al. and expectations. Shiftwork. Lack of opportunity to learn new skills. working conditions and security. Actualisation. Cook & Wall. Organizational commitment. Bearfield. Esteem. Role conflict. Need satisfaction based on Ancillary programmes.. These attempts at defining quality of working life have included theoretical approaches. (1959)(13) used “Hygiene factors” and “Motivator factors” to distinguish between the separate causes of job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction.g. correlational analyses. They defined quality of working life as satisfaction of these key needs through resources. An individual’s experience of satisfaction or dissatisfaction can be substantially rooted in their perception. Workload. although the relevance of non-work aspects is play down as attention is focussed on quality of work life rather than the broader concept of quality of life. In summary.and comparisons of internalised ideals. where it has been considered. Maslow’s needs were seen as relevant in underpinning this model. the most common cause of job dissatisfaction can be company policy and administration. The Hygiene factors or dissatisfaction-avoidance factors include aspects of the job environment such as interpersonal relationships. Professional isolation. Sirgy et al.. Siegel & Lee. lists of identified factors. Economic and family.

that is. Within the WRQoL measure. The WRQoWL measure uses 6 core factors to explain most of the variation in an individuals quality of working life: Job and Career Satisfaction. and is influenced by work. optimism and happiness. aims to assess the extent to which an individual feels good or content in themselves. in general. It is suggested that general well-being both influences. and feel stressed at work. are common. It has been proposed that this Positive Job Satisfaction factor is influenced by various issues including clarity of goals and role ambiguity. The General well-being (GWB)scale of the Work-Related Quality of Life scale (WRQoL)(18). Working Conditions. personal development career benefits and enhancement and training needs. their satisfaction or contentment with their job and career and the training they receive to do it. high stress is associated with high pressure. and may have a major impact on the general well-being of the population. appraisal. depression and anxiety. Mental health problems. the Work-Related Quality of Life scale (WRQoL)(18). Whilst it is possible to be pressured at work and not be stressed at work. recognition and reward. although further evaluation would be useful. or evaluation of. indicates that this assessment device should prove to be a useful instrument. predominantly depression and anxiety disorders. work-related stress and the relationship between work and non-work life domains (Loscocco & Roschelle. but also factors that broadly reflect life satisfaction and general feelings of well-being (Danna & Griffin. The WRQoL SAW factor is assessed through items dealing with demand and perception of stress and actual demand overload. Measurement There are few recognised measures of quality of working life. More recently. The WRQoL GWB factor assesses issues of mood. The Job & Career Satisfaction Job and Career satisfaction (JCS)scale of the the Work-Related Quality of Life scale (WRQoL) is said to reflect an employee’s feelings about. Quality of Working Life is not a unitary concept.It has generally been agreed however that Quality of Working Life is conceptually similar to well-being of employees but differs from job satisfaction which solely represents the workplace domain (Lawler. 1982)(15). A recent statistical analysis of a new measure. General Well-Being. in a way which may be independent of their work situation. . but has been seen as incorporating a hierarchy of perspectives that not only include work-based factors such as job satisfaction. 1991)(17) have also been identified as factors that should conceptually be included in Quality of Working Life. there is a very limited literature based on peer reviewed evbaluations of available assessments. and of those that exist few have evidence of validity and reliability. JCS is reflected by questions asking how satisfied people feel about their work. general quality of life. 1999)(16). Stress at Work and Control at Work. life satisfaction. The WRQoL Stress at Work sub-scale (SAW) reflects the extent to which an individual perceives they have excessive pressures. HomeWork Interface. satisfaction with pay and relationships with work colleagues.

and so feel dissatisfied. working conditions and security necessary to do their job effectively. and actively try to enjoy the leisure time that they can snatch. The Working Conditions scale of the WRQoL assesses the extent to which the employee is satisfied with the fundamental resources. noise – if the place where someone works is too noisy. yet Quality of Working Life as a theoretical construct remains relatively unexplored and unexplained within the organisational psychology research literature. flexibile working hours and the understanding of managers. Issues that appear to influence employee HWI include adequate facilities at work. Some of the factors used to measure quality of working life pick up on things that don’t actually make people feel good. But when it is quiet enough they don’t feel pleased or happy . such as job satisfaction.The Control at Work (CAW) subsacle of the WRQoL scale addresses how much employees feel they can control their work through the freedom to express their opinions and being involved in decisions at work. they might get frequent headaches. But all too often.they just don’t feel bad. Applications Regular assessment of Quality of Working Life can potentially provide organisations with important information about the welfare of their employees. Control at work. or even something they don’t even expect to enjoy. general well-being. . Worrall and Cooper (2006)(14) recently reported that a low level of well-being at work is estimated to cost about 5-10% of Gross National Product per annum. Perceived control at work as measureed by the Work-Related Quality of Life scale (WRQoL)(18)is recognized as a central concept in the understanding of relationships between stressful experiences. work-related stress and the home-work interface. decision making and decision control. within the theoretical model underpinning the WRQoL. Most people recognise the importance of sleeping well. people tend to see work as something they just have to put up with. is influenced by issues of communication at work. The WRQoL Home-Work Interface scale (HWI) measures the extent to which an employer is perceived to support the family and home life of employees. This can apply to a range of factors that affect someone's working conditions. or find they can not concentrate. but which seem to make people feel bad about work if those things are absent. For example. A large chunk of most peoples’ lives will be spent at work. Studies in the UK University sector have shown a valid measure of Quality of Working Life exists (19) and can be used as a basis for effective interventions. This scale also taps into satisfaction with the resources provided to help people do their jobs. behaviour and health. This factor explores the interrelationship between home and work life domains. Physical working conditions influence employee health and safety and thus employee Quality of working life.

5. 197-212. XIX 363-73 2. 12. Elizur D & Shye S 1990 Quality of work life and its relation to quality of life. . ABP 7. E.E. P. CL and Mumford.-Sylvie (2003) Health-related quality of life models: Systematic review of the literature.Other things seem to be more likely to make people feel good about work and themselves once the basics are OK at work. P. Promoting mental wellbeing through productive and healthy working conditions (20) emphasises the core role of assessment and understanding of the way working environments pose risks for psychological wellbeing through lack of control and excessive demand. VV and Jamal. Similarly. J and Wall. 39 3 275-291 4. New Haven: Yale University. The emphasis placed by NICE on assessment and monitoring wellbeing springs from the fact that these processes are the key first step in identifying areas for improveming quality of working life and addressing risks at work. 10.. Social-IndicatorsResearch. 129-148. Warr P. Measures of Job Satisfaction. 3.Ellis N & Pompli A 2002 Quality of working life for nurses. opportunities for career progression and using their abilities can contribute to someone's quality of working life. T (1979) Scales for the measurement of some work attitudes and aspects of psychological well being. The recent publication of National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) public health guidance 22. Taillefer. 8. Inst Work psychol.-Marie-Christine. Lawler III E and Porter L. Cook. Personnel Psychology.H. Wall T. M (1991) Routinisation of job context and job content as related to employees quality of working life: a study of psychiatric nurses. mental Health and Job-related Well-being. E (1979) The quality of working life in Western and Eastern Europe. Managers pay and their satisfaction with their pay. 9. Nov. Le-May. 379-386. Journal of organisational behaviour. and Lawler. 6. References 1. (1966). Clegg C & Stride C (1999) Eds. Hackman J & Oldham G (1974) The Job Diagnostic Survey. Baba. Mullarkey S. 52. not too much) can make them feel good.-Gilles. Challenging work (not too little. Mirvis. Journal of Occupational Psychology. Taylor J C in Cooper. Canberra. Warr. Commonwealth Dept of Health and Ageing. Roberge. Journal of Occupational Behaviour.-Marie-Anne. Vol 64 (2): 293-323 5. Applied psychology: An international review. Dupuis.. (1984) Accounting for the Quality of Work Life.

J. Promoting mental wellbeing through productive and healthy working conditions. Sirgy. S (2003)Quality of Working Life.acirrt. K. S. American Psychologist. pp. & Easton. 357-384. National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) public health guidance 22. Van Laar. N. A new measure of quality of work life (QoWL) based on need satisfaction and spillover theories. Worrall. 207-219. J. 20. P & Lee. 486-493. D. Edwards. Influences on the Quality of Work and Nonwork Life: Two Decades in Review. www. & Cooper. 14. New York:Wiley. Number 3. 18. . Danna. Strategies for improving the quality of work life. The Work-Related Quality of Life scale for healthcare workers. The Quality of Working Life: Managers’ health and well-being. W. 182-225. K. 325–333 19. 55. 12. Siegel. A. www. (1959) The Motivation to Work. C.L. 15. Journal of Vocational Behavior. Social Indicators Research. & Snyderman B. E. Van Laar. 15: 3. Efraty. Lawler.. Quality in Higher Education.. L.3. 2005. 37. (2009). L. Loscocco. 17. Mausner B. & Roschelle. (1999). A.. (1991). J & Easton.org.nice. (2001). E. D. 241302. OBJECTIVES PRIMARY OBJECTIVES:  To know the overall quality of work life in the organization and its impact on employees work culture. Journal of Advanced Nursing. (1982).uk/PH22 1. (2006). Chartered Management Institute. & Griffin. Aciirt Working paper 86. 16. Bearfield. University of Sydney. Journal of Management. Edwards. M.. Health and well-being in the workplace: A review and synthesis of the literature. D. 39. R. Herzberg F.. S (2007). The Work-Related Quality of Life (WRQoL) scale for Higher Education Employees.com 13. 25. Executive Report. D. Volume 60.11.

The workers expect the following needs to be fulfilled.4.  To identify the major areas of dissatisfaction if any.  To analyze the findings and suggestion for the study. 1. and provide valuable suggestions improving the employees satisfaction in those areas.SECONDARY OBJECTIVES:  To measure the level of satisfaction of employees towards the quality of work life. SCOPE OF QUALITY OF WORK LIFE: Quality of work life is a multi dimensional aspect.  To suggest suitable measures to improve the quality of work life. .

An organization responds to employee needs for developing mechanisms to allow them to share fully in making the decisions that design their lives at work. The organization should take care of health and safety of the employees.     Compensation the reward for the work should be fair and reasonable. Job specification should match the individuals. 1.5. Job security should be given to the employees. LIMITATION OF THE STUDY:  Time was the major constraint for the project. .

and can’t be generalized. CHAPTER-2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY . The study is restricted to HR dept..  Questionnaire is the major limitation for the project.  The individual perspective appears to be different.

2. When we talk of research methodology we not only talk of research methods but also consider the logic behind the methods we use in the context of our research study and explain why we are using a particular method or technique. Simple random sampling method was used in this project. 2.Research methodology is a way to systematically solve the research problem. The scope of research methodology is wider than that of research methods. Research design is the conceptual structure within which research is conducted. Stratified technique was applied so as to obtain a representative sample. because it helps to describe a particular situation prevailing within a company. it constitutes the blueprint for the collection. measurement and analysis of data.2 SAMPLING TECHNIQUE Sampling is the selection of some part of an aggregate or totality on the basis of which a judgment about the aggregate or totality is made. Careful design of the descriptive studies was necessary to ensure the complete interpretation of the situation and to ensure minimum bias in the collection of data.1 RESEARCH DESIGN “A research design is the arrangement of conditions for collection and analysis of data in a manner that aims to combine relevance to the research purpose with economy in procedure”. . Since population was not of a homogenous group. The type of research design used in the project was Descriptive research. It may be understood as a science of studying how research is done scientifically. The employees were stratified into a number of subpopulation or strata and sample items (employees) were selected from each stratum on the basis of simple random sampling.

The formula used to compute Percentage analysis is.5 TOOLS USED FOR ANALYSIS  Percentage analysis. Percentage analysis: One of the simplest methods of analysis is the percentage method.4 DATA COLLECTION METHOD Both the Primary and Secondary data collection method were used in the project. . it should neither be excessively large nor too small. This type of data was collected from the books.3 SIZE OF THE SAMPLE For a research study to be perfect the sample size selected should be optimal i. It is one of the traditional statistical tools. the data are reduced in the standard form with the base equal to 100. 2. which facilitates comparison. First time collected data are referred to as primary data. 2.  Chi-Square. The questionnaire consisted of a number of questions in printed form. It had both open-end closed end questions in it.  five point liker scales. In this research the primary data was collected by means of a Structured Questionnaire. journals. Here the sample size was bounded to 46. company records etc.e.2. Data which has already gone through the process of analysis or were used by someone else earlier is referred to secondary data. Through the use of percentage.

The formula used is. Greek letter chi. It describes the discrepancy theory and observation. ψ 2 = ∑ (O-E)2 E Where "O" is the observed Frequency "E" is the expected Frequency .Chi-Square It is a measure to study the divergence of actual and expected frequencies. It is represented by the symbol 2.

No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of No.CHAPTER-3 RESULT AND INTERPRETATION 3. . and 6.7 satisfied 23 50 neutral 10 22 dissatisfied 6 13 highly dissatisfied 3 6.3 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 8. 22% of employees are neutral.1.1. of percentage satisfaction Respondents highly satisfied 4 8. 13% of employees are dissatisfied.1: SI.3% of employees are highly dissatisfied with the salary package.7% of employees are highly satisfied with the salary package and 50% of employees are satisfied. Data analysis and interpretation: SATISFACTION OF SALARY PACKAGE Table 3.

1.1: .Table 3.

4% of employees are dissatisfied. and 0% of employees are highly dissatisfied. No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of No. 26% of employees are neutral.SATISFACTION OF CURRENT JOB Table 3.1. of percentage satisfaction Respondents highly satisfied 5 11 satisfied 27 59 neutral 12 26 dissatisfied 2 4 highly dissatisfied 0 0 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 11% of employees are highly satisfied with current job and 59% of employees are satisfied. .2: SI.

2: .Table 3.1.

and 4% of employees are highly dissatisfied with the casual leave.No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of satisfaction Strongly agree agree moderate disagree Strongly disagree No.CASUAL LEAVE Table3.1. .of percentage Respondents 2 4 19 41 16 36 7 15 2 4 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 4% of employees are highly satisfied with the casual leave and 41% of employees are satisfied. 15% of employees are dissatisfied. 36% of employees are neutral.3: SI.

Table3.1.3:

MEDICAL FACILITIES

Table 3.1.4: SI. No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of satisfaction Strongly agree agree moderate disagree Strongly disagree No. of Percentage Respondents 8 17 18 39 10 22 6 13 4 9 46 100

INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 17% of employees are highly satisfied with the medical facilities and 39% of employees are satisfied, 22% of employees are neutral, 13% of employees are dissatisfied, and 9% of employees are highly dissatisfied with the medical facilities.

Table 3.1.4:

24% of employees are neutral.BONUS Table 3. of Percentage Respondents 5 11 21 45 11 24 9 20 0 0 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 11% of employees are highly satisfied with the bonus and 45% of employees are satisfied. . No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of satisfaction Strongly agree agree moderate disagree Strongly disagree No.5: SI. and 0% of employees are highly dissatisfied with the bonus. .1. 20% of employees are dissatisfied.

Table 3.1.5: .

6: SI. 29.1. 7% of employees are dissatisfied. of Percentage Respondents 9 20 20 43.5 14 29.5 3 7 0 0 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 20% of employees are highly satisfied with the canteen facility and 43. and 0% of employees are highly dissatisfied .5% of employees are satisfied.Canteen facilities Table 3.5% of employees are neutral. . No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of satisfaction Strongly agree agree moderate disagree Strongly disagree No.

Table 3.1.6: .

of Percentage satisfaction Respondents highly satisfied 8 17 satisfied 20 44 neutral 16 35 dissatisfied 2 4 highly dissatisfied 0 0 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 17% of employees are highly satisfied with the ESI & PF and 44% of employees are satisfied. 4% of employees are dissatisfied. . 35% of employees are neutral.7: SI.1.ESI & PF Table 3. No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of No. and 0% of employees are highly dissatisfied with the ESI & PF.

1.Table 3.7: .

No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of No.5% of employees are highly satisfied with the healthy and safety working conditions and 50% of employees are satisfied. 4% of employees are dissatisfied. 28. .5 satisfied 23 50 neutral 13 28. of Percentage satisfaction Respondents highly satisfied 8 17. and 0% of employees are highly dissatisfied with the healthy and safety working conditions.HEALTHY & SAFETY WORKING CONDITIONS Table 3.8: SI.5% of employees are neutral.1.5 dissatisfied 2 4 highly dissatisfied 0 0 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 17.

1.8: .Table 3.

9: SI. and 4% of employees are highly dissatisfied with the job security. . 7% of employees are dissatisfied. No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of No. 15% of employees are neutral.1.Job security Table3. of Percentage satisfaction Respondents highly satisfied 5 11 satisfied 29 63 neutral 7 15 dissatisfied 3 7 highly dissatisfied 2 4 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 11% of employees are highly satisfied with the job security and 63% of employees are satisfied.

1.Table3.9: .

4% of employees are dissatisfied. No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of No. ..5 neutral 17 36. 36.1.10: SI. and 9% of employees are highly dissatisfied with promotion policy.5 dissatisfied 2 4 highly dissatisfied 4 9 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 7% of employees are highly satisfied with promotion policy and 43.5% of employees are satisfied.5% of employees are neutral.Promotion policy Table 3. of Percentage satisfaction Respondents highly satisfied 3 7 satisfied 20 43.

1.10: .Table 3.

44% of employees are neutral. . 0% of employees are dissatisfied.11: SI. No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of satisfaction Very good Good Ok Bad Very bad No. and 7% of employees are highly dissatisfied.QUALITY OF WORK LIFE Table 3. of Percentage Respondents 4 9 19 40 20 44 0 0 3 7 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 9% of employees are highly satisfied and 40% of employees are satisfied.1.

Table 3.11: .1.

Proper communication with employees Table 3.12: SI. .1. No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of satisfaction Strongly agree agree moderate disagree Strongly disagree No. 15% of employees are dissatisfied. of Percentage Respondents 9 20 18 39 12 26 7 15 0 0 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 20% of employees are highly satisfied with the attention of changes and 39% of employees are satisfied. 26% of employees are neutral. and 0% of employees are highly dissatisfied with the attention of changes.

12: .Table 3.1.

35% of employees are neutral. 7% of employees are dissatisfied. of Percentage Respondents 2 4 25 54 16 35 3 7 0 0 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 4% of employees are highly satisfied cordial relationship among employees and 54% of employees are satisfied. No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of satisfaction Strongly agree agree moderate disagree Strongly disagree No. .13: SI.CORDIAL RELATIONSHIP AMONG EMPLOYEES Table 3.1. and 0% of employees are highly dissatisfied cordial relationship among employees.

Table 3.1.13: .

Training Table 3.No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of No. of Percentage satisfaction Respondents highly satisfied 5 11 satisfied 21 45 neutral 16 35 dissatisfied 3 7 highly dissatisfied 1 2 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 11% of employees are highly satisfied with training and 45% of employees are satisfied.14: SI. 7% of employees are dissatisfied. and 2% of employees are highly dissatisfied with training. 35% of employees are neutral.1. .

14: .1.Table 3.

No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of No. and 2% of employees are highly dissatisfied performance appraisal. 26% of employees are neutral. .1.15: SI.SATISFACTION IN PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL Table 3. 13% of employees are dissatisfied. of Percentage satisfaction Respondents highly satisfied 3 7 satisfied 24 52 neutral 12 26 dissatisfied 6 13 highly dissatisfied 1 2 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 7% of employees are highly satisfied performance appraisal and 52% of employees are satisfied.

15: .1.Table 3.

4% of employees are dissatisfied.GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL Table 3.1. of Percentage satisfaction Respondents highly satisfied 4 9 satisfied 23 50 neutral 16 35 dissatisfied 2 4 highly dissatisfied 1 2 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 9% of employees are highly satisfied with grievance redressal and. 35% of employees are neutral. No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of No.16: SI. . and 2% of employees are highly dissatisfied with grievance redressal.

Table 3.16: .1.

17: SI. No 1 2 Level of satisfaction Yes No No. of Percentage Respondents 19 41 27 59 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 41% of employees are highly satisfied with reward recognition and 59% of them are highly dissatisfied with reward recognition.1.Reward Recognition Table 3. .

1.Table 3.17: .

1.18: SI. 13% of employees are dissatisfied.Career development Table 3. of Percentage Respondents 4 9 19 41 15 33 6 13 2 4 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 9% of employees are highly satisfied with the career development and 41% of employees are satisfied. . and 4% of employees are highly dissatisfied with the career development. No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of satisfaction Very high High Moderate Low Very low No. 33% of employees are neutral.

18: .Table 3.1.

1. 48% of employees are satisfied. 17% of employees are neutral. of Percentage Respondents 5 11 22 48 8 17 7 15 4 9 46 100 INFERENCE: It is seen from the table that 11% of employees are highly satisfied. No 1 2 3 4 5 Level of satisfaction Very true True Somewhat true Not too true Not at all true No. .19: SI. and 9% of employees are highly dissatisfied with the freedom of work. 15% of employees are dissatisfied.FREEDOM TO DO THEIR OWN WORK Table 3.

Table 3.19: .1.

Chi-square Analysis: QUALITY AGE BELOW 25Yrs 25-35Yrs 35-45Yrs 45-55Yrs 55Yrs Above Total Hypothesis: Highly satisfied 0 0 1 1 2 4 satisfied neutral Highly dissatisfied 3 5 4 3 4 19 2 6 5 3 4 20 2 1 0 0 0 3 Total 7 12 10 7 10 46 Null hypothesis H0: There is no significant difference between the age and the quality of work life Alternate hypothesis H1: There is significant difference between the age and the quality of work life The observed frequency (O) is the value obtained from the collected data and the expected frequency (E) is calculated using the equation Row total of the cell x column total of the cell E= -----------------------------------------------------------Grand total In the next step the corresponding values of O and E are calculated using the formula in equation ψ 2 = E (O-E) 2 .

There is no significant difference between the age and the quality of work life.02020202 4 4.20779344 Result: Here.46 -0.54 3.062954 3 2.22 0.39 0.29885057 3 3.22 0.65 -0.04 -1.08 -0.87 1.27868852 2 0.e.56410256 0 0.13 -0.26 -0. Since Table value> Calculated Value.13 2.87 0.0263158 4 4.56 0.26 -0.35 0.296.29885057 1 0.13 -0.f= (c-1)(r-1) = (5-1)(4-1)] at 5% level of significance is 26.65 -1.3 -2 0 0.13 -0.65 1.22 0.35 -0.2077 and the table value for degree of freedom is 12 [d.44 0.59770115 3 2.65 -0.78 1.95 0.3 -2 1.08 -0.7 -0.6842105 6 5.65 -1.11 0.08 6.22 -2 0 1.1609195 2 0.04 -1.062954 2 3.78 1. .08 -2 1 0.Observed(O) Expected(E) O-E (O-E) 2 (O-E) 2 /E 0 0.3 0.07612457 4 4.04 -2.05 0.26 2.07612457 5 4.26 0.13 -0.89 0.22 0.61 -0.04 -0.11 0.1 0.46 1. Null Hypothesis is accepted i.61 -1.35 -0.92 -2 0 0.61 0.89 0. the calculated value ψ 2 is 1.46 -0.04 -2.69565217 1 0.78 0.29885057 5 4.13 0.04 -0.

63% of employees are satisfied with the job security. 43. 59% of employees are highly dissatisfied with reward recognition.  48% of employees are satisfied with the freedom given to the employee for doing their own work.  41% of employees are satisfied with casual leave with pay.2. 44% of employees are neutral with quality of work life.3. 52% of employees are satisfied with performance appraisal.  From the chi square table there is no significant difference between the age and the quality of work life. 44% of employees are satisfied with the ESI & PF. 45% of employees are satisfied with the bonus. 41% of employees are satisfied with the career development. 50% of employees are satisfied with grievance redressal.  50% of employees are satisfied with the salary package. 45% of employees are satisfied with training. FINDINGS From the study. 39% of employees are satisfied with the attention of changes. 54% of employees are satisfied cordial relationship among employees. .5% of employees are satisfied with the promotion policy.                39% of employees are satisfied with the medical facilities.  59% of employees are satisfied with the current job.5% of employees are satisfied with the canteen facility. 43. 50% of employees are satisfied with the healthy and safety working conditions.

SUGGESSTIONS • Improving more policies and some good entertainment and relaxation programs for employees. • • • Establish career development systems Help to satisfy the employees esteem needs. Gift vouchers for the top performers in the department for giving an innovative idea for solving problems which is cost saving. • Improving good relationship with employees and providing friendly environment in the organization. • Making the employees to enjoy the work.3. time saving and is beneficial to the organization. .3.

CONCLUTIONS Social security scheme as well as welfare measures that are undertaken by the company are appreciable. .3. Welfare measures of the employees should be taken seriously by the top management to improve the satisfaction level by providing various benefits and facilities to them.4. These measures are not only for the company but also for the employees through satisfaction levels a company can ascertain whether an employee has shown his/her best performance on given job.

com .edu • www.citehr.R. Kothari • Research methodology – Uma Shekaran • Statistics for Management – Arora Website Referred: • www.BIBLIOGRAPHY • Research Methodology – C.google.

ANNEXURE QUESTIONNAIRE Respected Sir. PERSONAL DATA: Name Sex Age: below 25 yrs Educational Qualification Marital status Department Designation 25-35 yrs 35-45 yrs 45-55yrs Above55 yrs : _______________________ : _______________________ : _______________________ : _______________________ : _______________________ : _______________________ .

Are you satisfied with the bonus provided to you? Strongly Agree Agree Moderate Disagree Strongly Disagree 6. To what extend you are satisfied with the safety and healthy working conditions? Highly satisfied satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Highly Dissatisfied 9. Are you satisfied with your canteen facility? Highly satisfied satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Highly Dissatisfied 7. Are you satisfied with the promotion policies in your organization? Highly satisfied satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Highly Dissatisfied 11. Is the organization providing casual leave with pay? Strongly Agree Agree Moderate Disagree Strongly Disagree 4. What do you think about the quality of work life in the organization? . Are you satisfied with your salary package? Highly satisfied satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Highly Dissatisfied 2. What do you feel about the job security in your organization? Highly satisfied satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Highly Dissatisfied 10. How far you are satisfied with your current job? Highly satisfied satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Highly Dissatisfied 3. How far you are satisfied with the ESI and PF given by the organization? Strongly Agree Agree Moderate Disagree Strongly Disagree 8.Experience: Less than 5 yrs 5-10 yrs 10-15 yrs 15-20yrs Above20 yrs 1. What do you feel about the medical facilities provided by the concern? Strongly Agree Agree Moderate Disagree Strongly Disagree 5.

Are you satisfied with the training method used in your organization? Highly satisfied satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Highly Dissatisfied 16.What is the scope of your career development in the organization? Very high High Moderate Low Very low 20. How far you are satisfied with the training given by the employer? Highly satisfied satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Highly Dissatisfied 15. Are you getting reward as means of recognition? YES NO 19. . The company communicates every new change that takes place from time to time.Are you satisfied with the Grievance Redressel? Highly satisfied satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Highly Dissatisfied 18. To what extend the cordial relationship exist among the employees and superiors? Strongly Agree Agree Moderate Disagree Strongly Disagree 14. How do you find the performance appraisal methods adopted by your management? Highly satisfied satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Highly Dissatisfied 17. Strongly Agree Agree Moderate Disagree Strongly Disagree 13. Do they give freedom to decide how to do your own work? Very true True Somewhat true Not too true Not at all true Thank u.very good Good Ok Bad Very bad 12..

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.