Inferential Data Analysis Table No: Particulars Does not lose sight of goals Never Compromises on values Has an inspiring

vision Pragmatic ( willing to lose on immediate issues but not distracted from ultimate objectives) Inspires trust and hope Encourages dissenting opinions among closest advisors Listens to ideas, aspirations and needs of subordinates Creates consistent system of rewards, structure, process and communication Is committed to giving subordinates and opportunity to contribute in the organization Grand Mean Score Descriptive statistics on Transformational Leadership related factors Mean 3.4630 3.5000 3.1481 3.3333 3.4259 3.5370 3.6667 2.9815 3.5185 3.39 Std. Deviation 1.17703 .96642 1.05343 1.06399 1.07461 .94595 1.02791 1.17346 1.14498

Inference: Employee responses were gathered on selected aspects of Transformational leadership using Likert scale composed of 5 points starting from strongly disagree with 1 point to strongly agree with 5 points. Mean and standard deviation of the factors are presented in the table. Factors considered are leader does not lose sight of goals, leader never compromises on values, leader has an aspiring vision, leader is pragmatic, leader inspires trust and hope, leader encourages dissenting opinion among closer advisors, leader listens to ideas, aspirations and needs of subordinates, leader creates consistent system of rewards, structure, process and communication and leader is committed to giving subordinates and opportunity to contribute in the organization. As per the analysis, respondents have given a grand mean score of 3.39 on the leadership related aspects, with a standard deviation of 1, which means employees are in agreement that their leaders are transformational leaders. On two the factors leader encourages dissenting opinion among closer advisors, leader listens to ideas, aspirations and needs of subordinates leaders were rated little better near to agreement. We may infer that the leadership process is in transformation from task oriented to transformational. Table No: Particulars Does not lose sight of goals Never Compromises on values Has an inspiring vision Pragmatic ( willing to lose on immediate issues but not distracted from ultimate objectives) Inspires trust and hope Encourages dissenting opinions among -.007 -.174 .958 .209 Not Rejected Not Rejected Rejected Rejected -.081 .558 Correlation between Centralization and Transformational Leadership Aspects Centralization Sig. (2-tailed) -.237 -.127 -.101 .084 .361 .467 Null Hypothesis Alternative Hypothesis Not Rejected Not Rejected Not Rejected Not Rejected Rejected Rejected Rejected Rejected

05 hence. Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0. . Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study.008 . Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0.05 hence. aspirations and needs of subordinates Creates consistent system of rewards.025 . Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0. H0: Agreement with leader inspires trust and hope and Centralization are not significantly correlated. Ho cannot be Rejected. H1: Agreement with leader has an aspiring vision and Centralization are significantly correlated. Ho cannot be Rejected.952 Not Rejected Rejected H0: Agreement with leader does not lose sight of goals and Centralization is not significantly correlated. H0: Agreement with leader has an aspiring vision and Centralization are not significantly correlated. Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0.05 hence. Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study.05 hence. Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study. process and communication Is committed to giving subordinates and opportunity to contribute in the organization .859 Not Rejected Rejected -. H1: Agreement with leader does not lose sight of goals and Centralization is significantly correlated. H0: Agreement with leader encourages dissenting opinion among closer advisors and Centralization are not significantly correlated. Ho cannot be Rejected. H1: Agreement with leader never compromises on values and Centralization are significantly correlated.05 hence. Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study. H1: Agreement with leader encourages dissenting opinion among closer advisors and Centralization are significantly correlated. structure. H1: Agreement with leader inspires trust and hope and Centralization are significantly correlated. H0: Agreement with leader never compromises on values and Centralization are not significantly correlated. H0: Agreement with leader is pragmatic and Centralization are not significantly correlated. Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study. Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0. Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0. Ho cannot be Rejected. Ho cannot be Rejected.05 hence.113 . H1: Agreement with leader is pragmatic and Centralization are significantly correlated.418 Not Rejected Rejected .closest advisors Listens to ideas. Ho cannot be Rejected.

Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study. H0: Agreement with aspirations and needs of subordinates and Centralization are not significantly correlated.888889 Std.537037 3.05 hence. Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study. H1: Agreement with communication and leader is committed to giving subordinates and opportunity to contribute in the organization and Centralization are significantly correlated. H1: Agreement with leader listens to ideas and Centralization are significantly correlated. Ho cannot be Rejected. H0: Agreement with leader creates consistent system of rewards. Conclusion: From the responses we can conclude that majority of the employees perceive that their organizations are neither decentralized nor centralized. process and Centralization are not significantly correlated.05 hence. Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study.05 hence. Ho cannot be Rejected.021775 Relationship with co-workers/Superiors . and this organizational structure element will surely not support transformational leadership. Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0. structure. Ho cannot be Rejected. H0: Agreement with communication and leader is committed to giving subordinates and opportunity to contribute in the organization and Centralization are not significantly correlated. Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0. Table No: Particulars Working Hours Descriptive statistics of Job satisfaction related factors Mean 3. with a bent towards centralization. Deviation 1. Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0. H1: Agreement with aspirations and needs of subordinates and Centralization are significantly correlated. Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study. process and Centralization are significantly correlated. structure. H0: Agreement with leader listens to ideas and Centralization are not significantly correlated. H1: Agreement with leader creates consistent system of rewards. employees have not shown agreement with the factor that they are lead by the transformational leaders.05 hence.Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study.313399 1. Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0. With this discussion we can conclude that Centralization as the organizational structure element will not support transformational leadership. Due to this very reason. Ho cannot be Rejected.

169 Salary Growth/Opportunities from promotion Variety of Job responsibilities Recognition and Rewards .185185 2. From the aspects studied.632 .220744 1. Table no: Particulars Working Hours Correlation between Centralization and Job satisfaction Centralization -. with a standard deviation of 1.071354 1.035532 1.722222 3. respondents have given a grand mean score of 3.122323 Inference: Employee responses were gathered on selected aspects of Job Satisfaction using Likert scale composed of 5 points starting from Very dissatisfied with one point to very satisfied with 5 points.015 .944444 3. Growth/ Opportunities for promotion. Factors considered are working hours.1584 1.884 .106016 1.067 . which means employees are just above satisfaction level pertaining to Job satisfaction.729 .973 .15 on the Job Satisfaction related aspects. Salary.Opportunity to utilize your skills and talents Salary Growth/Opportunities from promotion Variety of Job responsibilities Recognition and Rewards Participation in decision making Motivation from Superiors Grand Mean 2. Recognition and rewards are the important areas seeking attention as satisfaction level is at least not equal to neutral level. Salary. Opportunity to utilize your skills and talents. (2-tailed) . Opportunity to utilize your skills and talents.055556 3.907407 2. Participation in decision making.277801 1.154 .203704 3. Recognition and rewards.981481 2. Mean and standard deviation of the factors are presented in the table. Relationship with co-workers/Superiors. As per the analysis. Motivation from superiors.214287 1. Growth/Opportunities for promotion.048 Sig.221 .005 -.265 .912 Null Hypothesis Not Rejected Not Rejected Not Rejected Not Rejected Not Rejected Not Rejected Not Rejected Alternative Hypothesis Rejected Rejected Rejected Rejected Rejected Rejected Rejected Relationship with co-workers/Superiors Opportunity to utilize your skills and talents -.020 . variety of Job responsibilities.

Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0. Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0.011 . H0: Level of satisfaction with respect to Salary and Centralization are not significantly correlated. Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study. H1: Level of satisfaction with respect to Salary and Centralization are significantly correlated. Ho cannot be Rejected.344* -. Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study. Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0.056 .690 Rejected Not Rejected Accepted Rejected H0: Level of satisfaction with respect to working hours and Centralization are not significantly correlated. H1: Level of satisfaction with respect to variety of Job responsibilities and Centralization are significantly correlated. Ho cannot be Rejected. H0: Level of satisfaction with respect to Relationship with co-workers/Superiors and Centralization are not significantly correlated.05 hence. Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study. H0: Level of satisfaction with respect to Opportunity to utilize your skills and talents and Centralization are not significantly correlated. H1: Level of satisfaction with respect to Opportunity to utilize your skills and talents and Centralization are significantly correlated. Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0.05 hence. H1: Level of satisfaction with respect to Relationship with co-workers/Superiors and Centralization are significantly correlated.Participation in decision making Motivation from Superiors -. Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study. Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0. Ho cannot be Rejected. Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study.05 hence. Ho cannot be Rejected. H0: Level of satisfaction with respect to variety of Job responsibilities and Centralization are not significantly correlated.05 hence.05 hence. Ho cannot be Rejected.05 hence. H0: Level of satisfaction with respect to Recognition and rewards and Centralization are not significantly correlated. H1: Level of satisfaction with respect to working hours and Centralization are significantly correlated. H1: Level of satisfaction with respect to Recognition and rewards and Centralization are significantly correlated. Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study. Ho cannot be Rejected. . H0: Level of satisfaction with respect to Growth/Opportunities for promotion and Centralization are not significantly correlated. Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0. H1: Level of satisfaction with respect to Growth/Opportunities for promotion and Centralization are significantly correlated.

344*). One of the factors under study participatory decision making and Centralization are negatively correlated. With this discussion we can conclude that Centralization as the organizational structure element will not increase job satisfaction. Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0. Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study. H1 is Accepted.05 hence. Due to this very reason. which results is a low level of Job satisfaction. Inference: There is significant correlation between the factors under study. Hence. which means higher the Centralization lesser the participation in decision making and vice versa. H0: Level of satisfaction with respect to Motivation from superiors and Centralization are not significantly correlated. Ho cannot be Rejected.Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is more than 0. Conclusion: From the responses we can conclude that majority of the employees perceive that their organizations are neither decentralized nor centralized. and this organizational structure element will generally not result in high levels of Job satisfaction in the knowledge economy. Ho cannot be Rejected. H1: Level of satisfaction with respect to Motivation from superiors and Centralization are significantly correlated. with a bent towards centralization. Result: At 5% level of Significance “p” value is less than 0. Ho is Rejected.05 hence. the organizations need to consider on revising the element of Centralization in order to make their structure more employee friendly. H1: Level of satisfaction with respect to Participation in decision making and Centralization are significantly correlated. H0: Level of satisfaction with respect to Participation in decision making and Centralization are not significantly correlated. The correlation established as per the study is negative correlation (-. Inference: There is no significant correlation between the factors under study.05 so. employees have not shown high level of Job satisfaction. .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful