You are on page 1of 82

TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.No Abstract List of tables List of figures CHAPTER – 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 1.2 1.3 Industry Profile Company Profile Product Profile CHAPTER – 2: DEVELOPMENT OF MAIN THEME 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Need of the study Objectives of the study Scope of the study Limitations of the study Review of Literature CHAPTER – 3: ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Research Methodology Analysis & Interpretation Findings Suggestions Conclusion APPENDIX Questionnaire Bibliography I V 21 26 72 76 77 13 14 15 16 17 1 7 9 CHAPTERS PAGE. NO. I II IV

ABSTRACT
This project titled as “A Comparative Study on the Performance of [COMPANY NAME] Alliance Insurance Company with its Industrial Competitors” focuses on some of the key issues like competitive position that [COMPANY NAME] holds, the strengths and weaknesses of the company’s insurance schemes, consumer’s awareness, customer’s perception etc. The sample size for this study is 120. The research design carried out for this study is descriptive research. Primary data are collected from the clients of various insurance companies through a structured undisguised questionnaire. Secondary data are gathered from the websites of [COMPANY NAME] and other companies for the purpose of making a comparative analysis. Statistical tools like graphs, interval estimation, chisquare test, H-test, and correlation have been used for the purpose of analysis. The findings of the study were arrived at based on the analysis conducted. Some of the major findings of the study relate to increased necessity of having a general insurance cover, higher reputation enjoyed by [COMPANY NAME] and priority to have auto/car and health insurance cover by majority of the respondents. Some of the suggestions of the study are to make amendments in the premium rates, to maintain the promptness in the claim settlement procedure, to introduce additional insurance covers and create more awareness about the products. The study is been concluded that the performance of [COMPANY NAME] is excellent in comparison with its industrial competitors and that the company has high growth prospects in future years to come.

LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO. 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.2.5 3.2.6 3.2.7 3.2.8 3.2.9 3.2.10 3.2.11 3.2.12 3.2.13 3.2.14 3.2.15 3.2.16 TITLE OF TABLE Age of respondents Gender of respondents Occupation of respondents Number of members in a family Annual income of respondents Necessity of having a general insurance cover No. of general insurance policies held by respondents Are the general insurance policies taken from the same company No. of companies in which respondent is a policy holder Companies enjoying higher reputation amidst customers Awareness among the [COMPANY NAME] customers towards insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME] Respondent’s opinion towards customer-centric products offered by [COMPANY NAME] Respondent’s comment on the service rendered by [COMPANY NAME] Sources by which the respondent’s became familiar of [COMPANY NAME] Period of insurance cover held by respondents Amount of yearly insurance premium paid by respondents. PAGE NO 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 35 36 38 40 41 42 43 44 47

3.2.17 3.2.18 3.2.19 3.2.20 3.2.21 3.2.22 3.2.23 3.2.24 3.2.25

Respondent’s comment on the yearly insurance premium paid Satisfactory level of respondents towards the policy taken No. of respondent’s having insurance agents

52 57 59

Respondent’s comment on the service rendered by insurance agents 61 Claims rejected by insurance companies 62 Factors that influences customers to choose a particular company in buying an insurance policy 64 Respondent’s satisfactory level towards various features of general insurance policy taken 68 Sources most preferred by respondents to know about an insurance company and its products 69 General Insurance cover that is most favored by respondents

6 3.8 3.2.9 3.LIST OF CHARTS CHART NO.2.10 3.2.2.16 3.7 3.12 3.3 3.1 3.15 3.13 3.5 3.2.2. of companies in which respondent is a policy holder Companies enjoying higher reputation amidst customers Awareness among the [COMPANY NAME] customers towards insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME] Respondent’s opinion towards customer-centric products offered by [COMPANY NAME] Respondent’s comment on the service rendered by [COMPANY NAME] Sources by which the respondent’s became familiar of [COMPANY NAME] Period of insurance cover held by respondents Amount of yearly insurance premium paid by respondents.2. of general insurance policies held by respondents Are the general insurance policies taken from the same company No.2.4 3.2.2.2.2.2.11 3.2.2. TITLE OF CHART Age of respondents Gender of respondents Occupation of respondents Number of members in a family Annual income of respondents Necessity of having a general insurance cover No.2. Respondent’s comment on the yearly insurance premium paid PAGE NO 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 35 37 38 40 41 42 43 44 48 3.17 .14 3.2.2 3.

2.2.2.19 No.24 Sources most preferred by respondents to know about an insurance company and its products 3.2.21 Claims rejected by insurance companies 3.2.20 Respondent’s comment on the service rendered by insurance agents 3.2.18 Satisfactory level of respondents towards the policy taken 3.2.22 Factors that influences customers to choose a particular company in buying an insurance policy 3.3.2.25 General Insurance cover that is most favored by respondents 53 57 60 61 63 65 68 71 .23 Respondent’s satisfactory level towards various features of general insurance policy taken 3. of respondent’s having insurance agents 3.

the competition is expected to remain intense as private sector insurers and those about to enter India seek to win market share from the more established public sector entities. if a house is burnt. In earlier economies. Should the same thing happen to one’s neighbour. Furthermore. new delivery system and a greater awareness of risk will generate growth. The Babylonians developed a system which was recorded in the famous Code of Hammurabi. and practiced by early Mediterranean sailing merchants. India’s insurance market will continue to experience major changes as its operating environment increasingly deregulates. respectively. Insurance in the modern sense. started as a methods of transferring or distributing risk were practiced by Chinese and Babylonian traders as long ago as the 3rd and 2nd millennia BC. For example. Chinese merchants traveling treacherous river rapids would redistribute their cargo across many vessels to limit the loss due to any single vessel’s capsizing. the other neighbors must come to help? Otherwise.1 INDUSTRY PROFILE Introduction The outlook for the general insurance industry in India is stable as per the financial forecast that has been made. we can see insurance in the form of people helping each other. a mix of new products.1. If a merchant received a loan to fund his shipment. neighbors will not receive help in the future. 1750 BC. the members of the community help build a new one. On the one hand. . With the removal of pricing controls on fire and engineering lies in 2007. India’s general insurance market witnessed a variety of changes as deregulation continued at a hectic pace. the number of private insurers is expected to grow as various foreign companies have announced intentions to establish joint ventures. he would pay the lender an additional sum in exchange for the lender’s guarantee to cancel the loan should the shipment be stolen. On the other hand. Over the medium and long term. History of Insurance industry In some sense we can say that insurance appeared simultaneously with appearance of human society. In 2006-07. c. insurers have since discounted their rates by 50% or more in their quest to retain or win market share.

Greek monarchs were the first to insure their people and made it official by registering the insuring process in governmental notary offices. They invented the concept of the ‘general average’. Merchants whose goods were being shipped together would pay a proportionally divided premium which would be used to reimburse any merchant whose goods were jettisoned during storm or sinking of the vessel in the sea. The Greeks and Romans introduced the origins of health and life insurance c. 600 AD when they organized guilds called “benevolent societies” which cared for the families and paid funeral expenses of members upon death. Guilds in the middle Ages served a similar purpose. Before insurance was established in the late 17th century, “friendly societies” existed in England, in which people donated amounts of money to a general sum that could be used for emergencies. Separate insurance contracts (i.e., insurance policies not bundled with loans or other kinds of contracts) were invented in Greeks rulers in the 14th century, as were insurance pools backed by pledges of landed estates. These new insurance contracts allowed insurance to be separated from investment, a separation of roles that first proved useful in marine insurance. Insurance became far more sophisticated in post-Renaissance Europe, and specialized varieties developed. Insurance as we know it today can be traced to the Great Fire of London, which in 1666 A.D devoured 13,200 houses. In the aftermath of this disaster, Nicholas Barbon opened an office to insure buildings. In 1680, he established England’s first fire insurance company, “The Fire Office,” to insure brick and frame homes. The first insurance company in the United States underwrote fire insurance and was formed in Charles Town (modern-day Charleston), South Carolina, in 1732. Evolution of insurance industry in India –Important milestones In India, insurance has a deep-rooted history. It finds mention in the writings of Manu (Manusmrithi ), Yagnavalkya ( Dharmasastra ) and Kautilya ( Arthasastra ). The writings talk in terms of pooling of resources that could be re-distributed in times of calamities such as fire, floods, epidemics and famine. This was probably a pre-cursor to modern day insurance. Ancient Indian history has preserved the earliest traces of

insurance in the form of marine trade loans and carriers’ contracts. Insurance in India has evolved over time heavily drawing from other countries, England in particular Year 1818 1834 1850 1870 1907 1912 1928 1956 Event The advent of life insurance business in India with the establishment of the Oriental Life Insurance Company in Calcutta. Oriental Life Insurance Failure The advent of General Insurance in India with the establishment of Triton Insurance Company Ltd in Calcutta The enactment of the British Insurance Act The Indian Mercantile Insurance Ltd was set up The Indian Life Assurance Companies Act, 1912 was the first statutory measure to regulate life business. The Indian Insurance Companies Act was enacted. Nationalization of Life Insurance Sector and Life Insurance Corporation .The LIC absorbed 154 Indian, 16 non-Indian insurers as also 75 provident 1971 1973 societies. The General Insurance Corporation of India was incorporated as a company  General insurance business was nationalized with effect from 1st January 1973.  107 insurers were amalgamated and grouped into four companies namely: 1) National Insurance Company Ltd., 2) The New India Assurance Company Ltd., 3) The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd 1993 4) The United India Insurance Company Ltd. The Government set up a committee under the chairmanship of RN Malhotra former Governor of RBI to propose recommendations for reforms in the 2000 insurance sector  The IRDA was incorporated as a statutory body in April 2000.  Foreign companies were allowed ownership of up to 26%.

2000-01 2001-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006

Insurance Industry had 16 new entrants, 10 in Life and 6 in General Insurance Insurance Industry had 5 new entrants, 2 in Life and 3 in General Insurance Industry had 1new entrant, Sahara India Insurance Company Ltd. In Life Insurance category Insurance Industry had 1new entrant, Shri Ram Insurance company Ltd. In Life Insurance category Bharti Axa Life insurance company was granted Certification of Registration in July Bharti Axa Life insurance company commenced its operations the newest player in the insurance sector.

Evolution of Non-Life insurance in India: The boycott of British goods and British institutions, which occurred because of the nationalist movement, encouraged formation of Indian-owned commercial and business houses. By 1907, the Indian mercantile the first of the long lasting general insurance companies to be established with Indian capital, had started functioning five offices, the New India, Vulcan, Jupiter, British India General and the Universal, were established in 1919 almost simultaneously for transacting general insurance business. In 1928, prominent insurance men of Bombay met and formed the Indian insurance companies association to protect the interest of Indian insurers. Leaders of the insurance industry began to organize conferences, educate public on the benefit of insurance, focus attention on the annual remove of national wealth through invisible export’s, and arise public interest in favour of Indian insurance. In 1950, the planning commission was set up to formulate plans for successive five years. This five year plan brought about large scale economic development and increased insurance consciousness among the people. As insurance business increased the number of claims for compensation against losses also naturally increased. Settlement of too many large claims meant a severe demand on the funds of insurance companies. So to prevent this situation the practice of ‘Reinsurance’ was adopted according to which insurers themselves reinsured portions of the insurances they had undertaken. So Indian

insurance companies with their expanding business wanted to reinsure for which they had to seek foreign reinsurance markets. Since the need for conserving foreign exchange was felt in India all the insurers in India as well as foreigners operating in India formed the India Reinsurance Corporation in 1956. This corporation provided reinsurance facilities. It was compulsory for insurers in India to reinsure a fixed percentage of their insurances with the corporation. The Insurance Amendment Act 1950 imposed certain limitations on expenses of management. The general insurance council constituted what was called the tariff committee to control and regulate terms and conditions of business. In 1972, the General Insurance Business (Nationalization) Act 1972 was passed under the provisions of this act. The general insurance corporation of India was established for the purpose of directing, controlling and caring on the general insurance business and all the 106 insurers were merged and grouped into four subsidiaries of the general insurance corporation of India namely:  National Insurance Company Ltd., with its head office at Calcutta.  The New India Assurance Company Ltd., with its head office at Bombay.  The Oriental Insurance company Ltd., with its head office at Delhi.  The United India Insurance Company Ltd., with its head office at Madras. Three Phases of De-Tariffing India’s general insurance industry has undergone de-tariffing in three phases:  1994 -- marine cargo, personal accident, health, banker liability and aviation  2005-06 -- marine hull segment  2007 -- Fire, engineering and motor own damage (OD). However, the de-tariffing did not immediately allow for free pricing. Instead, insurers were required to follow the “file and use” method, whereby they were expected to file a charter of proposed rates, which was then approved by IRDA. The only segment that remains under a tariff regime is the third party motor business, although there has been a large upward revision in this area’s premium rates by regulators

resulting in loss sharing. which has traditionally contributed to adverse claims ratios. Moreover. Quality in lending.in recent times. the capacities of domestic partners would no longer constrain capital levels for joint ventures. transparency in transactions. Most private players have tie-ups with international companies to compensate for their lack of experience in insurance. during which the sector was opened to private participation. Recently. commercial third party motor business. Within the private sector. [COMPANY NAME] is part of the [RESPECTIVE COMPANY NAME] Group of companies founded by TV . With the regulator possibly lifting the ceiling on foreign ownership to 49%. has made [COMPANY NAME] one of the most respected finance companies in India. Big changes have occurred over the last seven years. A number of potential new entrants await the necessary approvals. recording a 150% rise year-on-year in gross direct premium in the first nine months of 2007-08 1. In the private sector.4% market share for the period April-December 2007.2. [COMPANY NAME] is one of India's leading finance companies. has been moved to a common pool. but with foreign direct investment (FDI) capped at 26%. COMPANY PROFILE Founded in 1954. Insurance sector – moving quickly The Indian insurance sector is rapidly moving towards international standards of free (risk-based) market pricing and new/innovative product offerings. there were nine players with Future Generali the latest entrant as of September 2007. outstanding customer care and an unyielding commitment to being the best. ICICI Lombard (IL) leads with 12. Reliance General Insurance (RGI) as emerged as the fastest growing player.

It has the capability to write business in over 130 countries and with major operations in the UK.000 employees and in 2007. a letter of undertaking was signed to establish a joint venture insurance company. and is recognized as one of the most trusted and respected NBFC's in India. On 28th August 2000 the license application was submitted to the IRDA and the license was granted to [COMPANY NAME] on 23rd of October 2000 by the IRDA. With an almost 300 year heritage. [COMPANY NAME] Limited was started as a subsidiary of MMGI to provide customers with a range of finance and hire-purchase options for Light. In the 1950s. 650. RSA is one of the world’s leading multinational quoted insurance groups. Cars. Machinery and Equipment. first .[RESPECTIVE COMPANY NAME] Iyengar in the early part of last century. Since then the company have been innovating constantly for its customers. [COMPANY NAME] has a Nation-wide presence with over 167 branches. Asia and the Middle East and Latin America. the first to offer segment specific business solutions. Scandinavia. Focusing on general insurance. it has around 22. [COMPANY NAME] is one of the most well known and oldest insurance companies in the world. It has over 50 years of experience in operation. Canada. [COMPANY NAME] was formally launched as a company on 12th March 2001. its net written premium were £5.8bn [COMPANY NAME] is a joint venture between [COMPANY NAME] and Royal & Sun Alliance and in April 2000. the [RESPECTIVE COMPANY NAME] group diversified into general insurance with the Madras Motor and General Insurance Company (MMGI).000 commercial vehicle and car finance customers. having begun its operations in 1710. Ireland. Jeeps. Like being the first to offer cashless hospitalisation. The company continues to enjoy highest credit rating of AAA from leading rating agencies in the country. Medium & Heavy Commercial Vehicles. making it the first private insurer to obtain a license for conducting in the Non-Life segment.000 depositors and nearly 100.

one of the oldest and the second largest general insurer in the UK. innovation in terms of products and services. 1. Mumbai. personalized customer service. Royal [RESPECTIVE COMPANY NAME] brings the golden heritage and reliability of [COMPANY NAME] (AAA). Underwriting. PRODUCT PROFILE Marine Insurance . The company is now in the eighth year of operation. Each of these Regional Offices is staffed by a team of insurance professionals responsible for Customer Servicing. Guargon and Kolkata supported by a network of 35 Branch Offices. first to introduce industry-specific proposition. The coming together of these two financial giants allows them to offer its customers the best global practices in insurance industry. Their product range is designed to provide extra cover to a varied range of customers starting from the common man to corporate conglomerates.3. and RSA. The shareholders of [COMPANY NAME] are as follows:   [COMPANY NAME] and Associates 74% [COMPANY NAME] London 26% Working from a corporate office in Chennai. Business Development. Operations and Claims Management. one of the most respected non-banking financial institution in India.to offer co-branded credit cards. and unmatched. [COMPANY NAME] has been carrying out its business in over 150 cities with four fully operational Regional Centers in Chennai.

inundation. Burglary insurance Burglary Insurance for machinery. It is a comprehensive insurance which provides complete protection against all types of civil construction risks. Burglary Insurance covers burglary or housebreaking accompanied by either forcible or violent entry into/exit from the premises and hold-up. Engineering Insurance:  Erection All Risks Insurance The Erection All Risks policy is a comprehensive insurance. commissioning of machinery. which provides complete protection against all types of risks associated with erection. cyclone and other accidental damages. storm.  Contractor's All Risks Insurance All types of civil engineering works. flood. Their products considerably widen the scope of coverage presently enjoyed by the insured population without necessarily involving a high premium. plant and equipment during constructional stage. furniture. lightning.  Boiler & Pressure Plant Insurance It covers the risk of explosion and collapse of any boiler or other pressure plant in the course of ordinary working. testing. fixtures & fittings and for goods held in trust or on commission for the insured is responsible.  Machinery Breakdown Insurance . stock in trade.[COMPANY NAME] brings to India a wide range of marine cargo products from various international markets. ranging from small buildings to massive dams are exposed to damage from a wide range of causes such as fire.

It covers the property whether they are at work or at rest or being dismantled for the purpose of cleaning or overhauling.  Workmen's Compensation Insurance It provides Insurance against occupational accident or disease to an employee whilst in course of his employment. In some countries legal rights and duties are framed in a Civil Code. this is known as "Common Law".[COMPANY NAME] extend its hand offering Machinery Breakdown Insurance Cover ably supported by most capable technocrats to throw more light about the mechanical side of all machines.  Contractor's Plant & Machinery Contractor's Plant & Machinery is an exclusive all risks policy covering the plant & machinery used by the contractors at the site for various projects. but in any case only after successful commissioning. In others they are not codified but drawn from the precedent of decisions handed down in the courts over the centuries. . It is a combination of Erection-All-Risks and Marine Insurance to cater to the needs of the client where Marine/Transit insurance is connected with Erection All Risks Insurance of any project. or in the course of operations or when being shifted within the premises or during subsequent re-erection. Liability Insurance:  Product Liability Insurance Liability arises from a civil wrong or breach of personal duty imposed by law on a person and owed to his/her fellow citizens.  Marine-Cum-Erection Insurance It is developed as a comprehensive product to manage the risk and insurance needs in course of erection as well as during transit.

You do not need to analyze and evaluate a large number of insurance policies to insure your business completely. Public Liability Act It provides indemnity against the Insured's liability at law to the public in general (excluding employees) for bodily injury and loss of or damage to property due to the business activities carried on in insured's premises. Business solutions:  Industrial All Risks Policy It’s a wide and comprehensive cover for the large sized business where the assets at all locations of the insured exceed Rs.  Traders Shield .  Enterprise Shield.100 Corers. breakdown as well as business interruption.  Education Shield Tailor-made cover designed to suit the specific needs of Education Industry. irrespective of the number of locations.  Hotel Shield Tailor-made cover designed to suit the specific needs of the Hotel Industry.  Office Shield A flexible policy specifically designed to meet the insurance needs of your modern office. It is an All Risks Policy covering a wide range of perils such as fire and allied perils. burglary. It is a newly devised package providing total insurance solutions for industries. accidental damage.

stocks.  Group Health Health Premium Platinum is a comprehensive health insurance package. furniture. plant and machinery. mobiles.  Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy It offers cover against fire and allied perils and the perils of nature.It is an attractive policy that provides shopkeepers with a basic insurance package and a further range of optional covers. The policy can cover building (including plinth and foundation).  Consequential Loss (Fire) Insurance It provides protection against loss of profits in business due to an interruption in business consequent upon an insured peril covered under the material damage policy.  Workmen's Compensation . cameras and projectors.  All Risks Policy for Portable Equipments It offers an overall solution to cover portable items like laptops. designed for the employees of company and their family members. fixtures and fittings and other contents. Employee solutions:  Group Personal Accident Policy It is a worldwide cover providing protection for the employees against any accidental injuries sustained by the individuals resulting in death and disablement.

2. This study also helps in making necessary changes in the attributes of the insurance cover offered by the company so that the customers can enjoy the benefits of the insurance cover.1 NEED OF THE STUDY This study helps the company to identify its competitive position among its industrial competitors by which the company can further improve its performance to enjoy high reputation among clients. .Workmen's Compensation provides cover to target clients as required by law in support to project insurances or property insurances. The need for the study also arises to identify and offer additional insurance products according to the expectations of the customers.

2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY PRIMARY OBJECTIVES To compare the performance of [COMPANY NAME] with other competitors in the general insurance industry.2. To find out the strengths and weaknesses of the company’s insurance schemes To study consumer’s awareness towards insurance products To identify the customer’s perception about the company and its products. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES To identify the position [COMPANY NAME] holds among other private players.      .

customer’s perception. etc also holds good for other companies in the life and non-life insurance segment. . The study which focuses on various aspects such as competitive position of [COMPANY NAME].2. The outcome of the study. which are based on the above aspects can be utilized by the marketing department of both life and non-life insurance companies. strengths and weaknesses of insurance covers.3 SCOPE OF THE STUDY This study has a wider scope among the insurance sector.

    . they have been overshadowed by the benefits of the study. The survey conducted may not be considered as comprehensive as only limited respondents could be contacted because of the time constraint. the conclusions drawn based on this may not be a reflection of the entire population. Some of the respondents were reluctant to give their responses. Only limited sample size had been considered for the study and therefore. As it is understood that the limitations are a part of the project.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY There were certain limitations in undertaking this research work.2. Objectives and the purposes of the study and the questions had to be explained to the respondents and their responses may be biased.

Despite significant positive changes. the entry of a large number of Indian and foreign private companies has led to greater choice in terms of products and services for Indian consumers. A growing realisation of the benefits and importance of sophisticated insurance and reinsurance tools has broadened the pool of potential buyers of insurance. market players. In addition. Several significant structural changes are expected in the insurance market that will influence the country’s development in the medium to long term So far. Given this backdrop. infrastructure development. they are likely to have increased access to the international reinsurance markets.5 REVIEW OF LITERATURE According to the recent report of Lloyd. . Regulatory changes in the four areas– products. Over the next three years.2. the Indian insurance market is likely to see its process of maturation accelerate. increased foreign direct investment. the insurance market must still face the challenge of poor customer perceptions and the danger that the pace of reform will slow. premium growth is being driven by other factors such as the growing consumer class. • As Indian insurers build a profitable portfolio. distribution and reinsurance – will drive change in the Indian insurance market in the medium term. the Indian insurance market is likely to change in the next few years significantly largely due to regulatory changes. • The practice of cross-subsidisation is likely to be phased out as risk-based pricing is used increasingly for all products. and an increased awareness of catastrophe exposure. • Price competition has already begun to increase and is likely to continue to do so for the next 18 to 24months. the Indian insurance market has experienced considerable growth since its liberalisation in 2000.

where good growth is expected. the market share of public insurers has consistently declined. the focus has shifted towards the retail segments of motor and health. The losses related to this segment now get shared among all the players. However. The private sector share of third party motor business was much lower in the past than that for public firms as the former did not pursue this market because of its negative underwriting margins. rising demand for insurance is likely to be met by increased capacity as foreign insurers look to access this growing market. leaving little incentive to avoid this segment. the following facts relating to the performance of both private and public sector general insurance companies were made. Private Sector’s Growing Influence The private sector has been steadily growing market share despite the fact that public sector companies have been around for a lot longer. the market share of the private sector is catching that of the public sector and the two will likely converge over the medium term. Their limited capacity to innovate has impacted their ability to tailor and aggressively price . Market Share – Redistribution Due to the effectiveness of private marketing strategies.• Finally. Given a faster growth rate. the situation has changed. with the formation of the common third party motor pool. whereas the public sector companies have been constrained by their traditions and inability to innovate. The private insurers enjoy considerable operational flexibility. Fire and engineering now broadly contribute a similar proportion of overall business for the private and public sectors. In terms of overall business. Operational Flexibility The public entities lack the operational flexibility enjoyed by the private players. As per the recent research by Moody’s – ICRA Global Insurance.

Strong Infrastructure and Systems Private players are not hindered by their charters or legacy systems and have constructed technologically advanced infrastructure. . public entities have only recently upgraded their systems and have to grapple with transition issues. They have drawn talent from public sector companies. They have been unable to expedite claim settlements through out-of-court negotiations since a large proportion of their claims pertain to the third party motor segment. something which could give them a strong pricing edge in a detariffed environment. This characteristic enables in turn quick and effective decision-making for pricing and claims settlements. The result is a time-consuming and involved process. have selectively targeted the more profitable lines of the public sector companies for growth. especially during their initial years. They are encumbered by legacy systems and fragmented databases. They benefit from the experiences of the public sector as well as their international joint-venture partners. and have not fully used their past claim experiences. such as moving from paper to paper-less systems. Focused Underwriting Strategy The private players. On the other hand. They started with large investments in technology. which is subject to adjudication by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal.products for large corporations. The private players by contrast have focused on accountlevel profitability for large corporations and have expanded their shares by crosssubsidizing tariffed products. which helped them to build robust data management systems. attributes vital to building franchises. Client Servicing The public insurers have also been hampered in claims servicing by their process oriented approach and limited operational flexibility.

When the structural changes above are taken into consideration. bancassurance. including 228 direct brokers. . this growth becomes exponential. brokers. Most insurers now have tie-ups with the banks. As of December 31 2007. second largest private player) has tie-ups with large number of banks. low cost channels like tele-sales and the internet are still not developed in India. ICICI Lombard sources a major portion of its business from a tie-up with ICICI Bank. The claim settlement performance of the private sector has also been superior because of the limited amount of third party motor business that they have underwritten.6bn in 2010. with relatively slow growth in 2007 rising to rapid growth by 2010. through which 75% of total premium income is sourced. 33 composite brokers and 6 reinsurance brokers. Such claims normally take a longer time to settle. mainly due to relatively poor knowledge about insurance products and low internet penetration. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited (BAIL. which contribute a big share of its total premium income. direct marketing and direct sales channels -. The simplest forecasts suggest that premium income could double in the next few years to reach USD11. the broking community will have plenty of opportunity to become an integral part of the insurance and risk financing process. At this time. thereby differentiating themselves from public sector insurers. For example. Distribution – Rise of Bancassurance The Indian general insurance industry has historically been dominated by the agency channel. which act as corporate agents and are remunerated on a commission basis. corporate agents. One conclusion is certain– the Indian non-life market is set to grow dramatically over the next few years. In a deregulated environment. Similarly. But in recent periods other channels – for example. 267 brokers were registered with IRDA.are gaining importance.Superior Claim Paying/Processing Capability The combination of superior technology and selective underwriting has allowed the private sector to set high standards for policyholder services.

structure to answer whom. multiple choice.  Primary Data Primary data have been directly collected from the clients of [COMPANY NAME] as well from the clients of other insurance companies by survey method through undisguised structured questionnaire. this research study is categorized as Descriptive Research Method DATA COLLECTION The main source of information for this study is based on the data collection.  Secondary Data Secondary data have been collected from official website of [COMPANY NAME] and also from other official websites related to general insurance industry . Here plan is an outline of the research scheme & which the researcher has to work. dichotomous and ranking type have been used for the purpose of data collection. close ended. Hence. The main characteristics of this method is that the researcher has no control over the variables and he can only report what has happened or what is happening. when. Questions like open ended. Data collected are both primary and secondary in nature.1 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY RESEARCH DESIGN Research design is the plan.3. Descriptive Research Design The type of research design used in this study is the descriptive research. The structure of the research is a more specific outline and the strategy out. where and how the subject is under investigation. specifying the methods to be used in the connection & analysis of the data. This study which compares the performance of [COMPANY NAME] with its industrial competitors has been undertaken based on the opinions of the consumers.

This type of sampling is basically used when you simply stop anybody in the street who is prepared to stop. asking people you meet whether they will answer your questions. a shop.  Ranking In ranking. a restaurant. or when you wander round a business. a theatre or whatever.  Close ended question Close ended question are the type of questions with a clear declined set of alternatives that confine the respondents to choose one of them. questions will have the ranking skill.TYPES OF QUESTIONS  Open ended question Open ended question are the type of question used to get suggestion from the respondent in order to give feed back to the organization. the sample comprises subjects who are simply available in a convenient way to the researcher.  Multiple choice question It consists of multiple choices in which the respondents can choose more than one Likert scale  It uses 5 point or 7 point scale to elicit respondent’s favour or unfavour towards an object. There is no randomness . In other words. which the respondents are free to rank them according to their preference. SAMPLING Convenience sampling is been used in the study.  Dichotomous question It consists of two choices of answers in which the respondent has to choose one of them.

However.and the likelihood of bias is high.9143 * . Chi-square describes the magnitude of the discrepancy between theory and observation. this method is often the only feasible one.962 * 0. particularly for students or others with restricted time and resources. Sample size for the study was arrived at 120 by using the formula: n = z2 * p * q e2 n = 1. SAMPLE SIZE Sample size is the total number of samples selected for the study from the sampling population. and can legitimately be used provided its limitations are clearly understood and stated. This limitation has led to the development of a group of alternative techniques known as non-parametric tests.086 0. .052 = 120 METHODS / TOOLS OF ANALYSIS Tools used for analysis are: • • • • • • • Chi-square test Weighted average method Interval estimation Karl Pearson’s coefficient of correlation H-test Graph Percentage 1. CHI-SQUARE TEST There may be situation in which it is not possible to make any rigid assumption about distribution of the population from which samples being drawn. You can't draw any meaningful conclusions from the results you obtain.

KARL PEARSON’S COEFFICIENT OF CORRELATION Correlation analysis helps us in determining the degree of relationship between 2 or more variables. of sample size 3. it means there is perfect positive correlation between the variables.2. ( p . INTERVAL ESTIMATION METHOD An estimation of a population parameter given by 2 numbers between when the parameter may be considered to lie is called interval estimation of the parameter. Net score = (weight for column * no. ∑ xy . When r = +1. The value of the coefficient of correlation as obtained by the below formula shall always lie between +1 and -1. there is no relationship between the two variables.z √pq . there is perfect negative correlation between the variables and when r = 0. When r = -1. p + z √pq ) n n p = sample proportion of success q = sample proportion of failure z = standard variance of the confidence level n = no. n ∑ [(Oi – Ei) 2] with n-1 degrees of freedom i =1 Ei WEIGHTED AVERAGE METHOD χ² = This method is widely used in finding the weightage given to different attributed by respondents. The respondents assign different weightage to the different ranking and weighted average percentage is found and graphs are plotted. of respondents) Total weight Net score in %age = net score in row Total net score*100 3.

GRAPHS Graphical method was used in order to represent the factor in various graphical methods like pie-chart. of respondents *100 Total respondents 6.1 TABLE SHOWING AGE OF RESPONDENTS . bar diagram and cylinder.r = -------------------_________ √∑x2 . 3. It is used to test the null hypothesis that several independent samples come from the same population. Percentage = No.X) .∑ y2 __ __ x = (X . y = (Y . H = [12 / (N (N+1)) * (R12/ n1 + R22 / n2 + R32 / n3 + R42 / n4 + R52 / n5)] – 3 (n + 1) Ri = Sum of ranks of sample i 5.2. PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS Percentage analysis shows the entire population in terms of percentages. H-test is used. H-TEST When more than two random samples are given.Y) 4.

67% fall under the category of 25-35 years.67 10 10. 35.67 16.e. 10%) of respondents in the age group of 45-55 years 3.67 10 10.83 Less 25-35 than 25 yrs 35-45 45-55 Above 55 yrs Age in years 3. of 20 respondents 15 10 5 0 35.83%) of respondents in the age group of less than 25 years and comparatively very lower percentage (i.2. Of Respondents 43 32 20 12 13 120 Percentage (%) 35.83 100 Findings: The above table shows that 35.83 26. 16. 10% belong to the age group of 45-55 years and the rest 10.No 1 Gender Male No.S.2.83% above 55 years Inference: It is inferred that there is a higher percentage (i.5 .67 16. Of Respondents 81 Percentage (%) 67.67% belong to the age group of 35-45 years.83% of the respondents belong to the age group of less than 25 years. 26.2 TABLE SHOWING GENDER OF RESPONDENTS S.No 1 2 3 4 5 Age Less than 25 yrs 25-35 35-45 45-55 Above 55 yrs Total No.e.1 CHART SHOWING AGE OF RESPONDENTS 40 35 30 25 No.83 26.

5%) of male respondents.5 3.of respondents 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Male Female 32.2.5 100 Findings: The above table shows that 67.3 TABLE SHOWING OCCUPATION OF RESPONDENTS S. 3.5% of respondents are male and 32. 67.5% are female respondents Inference: It is inferred that there is a higher percentage (i.83 .2 Female Total 39 120 32.2 CHART SHOWING GENDER OF RESPONDENTS 67.5 70 No.e.No 1 Occupation Service No. Of Respondents 25 Percentage (%) 20.2.

17 15. employee Business occupation Professional Others 20. employee Business Professional Others Total 16 23 19 37 120 13.4 TABLE SHOWING NUMBER OF MEMBERS IN A FAMILY S.83% of respondents belong to the category of services.83% are professional and the rest 30. of family members 2-4 5-8 More than 8 Total No.2.No 1 2 3 No.83% belong to other category.17% belong to the category of business.33% are government employees.17 15.30.83 3.33 19. of respondents 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Service Govt.33 19.2. which comprises of private sector employee Inference: It is inferred that there is a higher percentage (i.83%) of respondents in the category comprising private sector employees.17 100 .83 30. Of Respondents 91 29 120 Percentage (%) 75. 19.2 3 4 5 Govt.83 13. 3. 13.e.83 30. 15.83 24.83 100 Findings: The above table shows that 20.3 CHART SHOWING OCCUPATION OF RESPONDENTS 35 No.

5 16. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (75.Findings: The above table shows that 75.17% of respondents have 5-8 members in their family.67 7.17 2 to 4 0 20 40 No.5 100 .83 42.of respondents 60 75. Of Respondents 31 51 20 9 9 120 Percentage (%) 25.83% of respondents have 2-4 members in their family and the rest 24.5 7.No 1 2 3 4 5 Annual income Less than Rs.83 80 3.2 lakhs Rs.10-20 lakhs Above Rs.5 -10 lakhs Rs. of family members More than 8 0 5 to 8 24.83%) of respondents have 2-4 members in their family 3.4 CHART SHOWING NUMBER OF MEMBERS IN A FAMILY No.2.2-5 lakhs Rs.5 TABLE SHOWING ANNUAL INCOME OF RESPONDENTS S.20 lakhs Total No.2.

7.Findings: The above table shows that 25. 16.10-20 lakhs Above Rs.5% fall under the category of 2-5 lakhs.5 25.83% of respondents fall under the income category of less than 2 lakhs.5% in the category of 10-20 lakhs and the rest 7.83 16.5 CHART SHOWING ANNUAL INCOME OF RESPONDENTS 45 40 No.67% fall under the income category of 5-10 lakhs. of respondents 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Less than Rs.2 lakhs Rs.5 7. Of Respondents RSA Other companies 60 60 60 60 Percentage (%) RSA Other companies 100 100 100 100 .5%) of respondents in the income category of 2-5 lakhs and comparatively a very lower percentage (7.5%) of respondents in the income category of 10-20 lakhs and above 20 lakhs 3.6 TABLE SHOWING THE NECESSITY OF HAVING A GENERAL INSURANCE COVER S.20 lakhs 7.2.2.5% in the income category above 20 lakhs Inference: It is inferred that there is a higher percentage (42.5 Annual Income 3.2-5 lakhs Rs.5 -10 lakhs Rs.67 42. 42.No 1 2 Opinion Yes No Total No.

Inference: It is inferred that all the respondents surveyed have stated that it is necessary to have a general insurance cover. Of Respondents 62 41 17 120 Percentage (%) 51. OF GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES HELD BY RESPONDENTS S.Findings: The above table shows that 100% of respondents.of 30 respondents 20 10 0 yes 60 RSA Other companies 0 no 0 3.No 1 2 3 No. of policies 1 2-4 More than 4 Total No. have responded that it is necessary to have a general insurance cover. who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] and 100% who are policy holders with other companies.2.7 TABLE SHOWING NO.67 34. 3.6 CHART SHOWING THE NECESSITY OF HAVING A GENERAL INSURANCE COVER 60 60 50 40 No.17 14.2.17 100 .

67 60 No.of policies More than 4 34.17 3.17% holds more than 4 general insurance policies.No 1 2 Opinion Yes No Total No.17% holds 2 to 4 policies and the rest 14.17 14. 3. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (51. Of Respondents 66 54 120 Percentage (%) 55 45 100 Findings: The above table shows that 55% of respondents hold general insurance policy with the same company and 45% of respondents hold it in various other companies.2. 34.Findings: The above table shows that 51.67%) of respondents holds 1 general insurance policy.67% of respondents hold 1 policy.7 CHART SHOWING NO.8 TABLE SHOWING WHETHER THE GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES ARE TAKEN FROM THE SAME COMPANY S. .of respondents 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 to 4 No. OF GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES HELD BY RESPONDENTS 51.2.

of respondents 50 40 30 20 10 0 Yes No 45 INTERVAL ESTIMATION: WHETHER THE GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES TAKEN FROM THE SAME COMPANY Formula: p ± Zα /2 pq n No. of respondents who have taken policies from the same company: 66 No.8 CHART SHOWING WHETHER THE GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES ARE TAKEN FROM THE SAME COMPANY 55 60 No.Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (55%) of respondents holds general insurance policy with the same company.2. 3. of respondents who have not taken policies from the same company: 54 .

85 100 .96 at 95% confidence level __________ pq Standard error = = .1% to 63.639 = 46.9 TABLE SHOWING NO.OF COMPANIES IN WHICH RESPONDENT IS A POLICY HOLDER S.1%. of companies 2 companies 2-5 More than 5 companies Total No.0454 n 120 Interval estimation= p ± Zα / 2 = (0. Of Respondents 43 10 1 54 Percentage (%) 79.55 Sample size 120 q = 1-p = 1-.0454) = 0.55 * . we conclude that the percentage of respondents who have taken policies from the same company lies between 46.96(0.45 = 0.2.45 Z α / 2 = 1.55 ± 1.63 18.No 1 2 3 No.55 = .9% 3.n = sample size = 120 p= Number of yes = 66 = .52 1.4610>p>0.9% pq n Conclusion Hence. 63.

No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Companies [COMPANY NAME] TATA AIG Bajaj Allianz Iffco tokio ICICI Reliance Others Total No.67 10 11. 3.851 2 companies 2 to 5 More than 5 companies 3.67 9.2. 18.63% of respondents are policy holders in 2 companies.63%) are policy holders in at least 2 companies.85% of respondents are policy holders in more than 5 companies.of respondents 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 79.OF COMPANIES IN WHICH RESPONDENT IS A POLICY HOLDER 80 No.10 TABLE SHOWING COMPANIES ENJOYING HIGH REPUTATION AMIDST CUSTOMERS.51 1.17 100 .Findings: The above table shows that 79. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage of respondents (79.2.63 18. S.52% of respondents are policy holders in 2-5 companies and the rest 1.5 6. Of Respondents 47 13 15 8 12 14 11 120 Percentage (%) 39.17 10.83 12.10 CHART SHOWING NO.

10 CHART SHOWING COMPANIES ENJOYING HIGH REPUTATION AMIDST CUSTOMERS .17% of respondents have stated [COMPANY NAME]. 10% of them have stated ICICI. 10.5% have stated Bajaj Allianz. 3. 6. 12.67% have stated Iffco Tokio. 11.Findings: The above table shows that 39.83% have stated TATA AIG.2.17% of respondents stating it.6% of them have stated Reliance and the rest 9.17% of them have stated other companies like Cholamandalam and Public sector insurance companies Inference: It is inferred that higher reputation amidst customers is enjoyed by [COMPANY NAME] with 39.

11 TABLE SHOWING AWARENESS AMONGST [COMPANY NAME] CUSTOMERS TOWARDS THE INSURANCE SCHEMES OFFERED BY [COMPANY NAME] .2.Others 9% Reliance 12% ICICI 10% Iffco tokio 7% Bajaj Allianz 12% TATA AIG 11% Royal Sundaram 39% 3.

Of Respondents 45 15 60 Percentage (%) 75 25 100 Findings: The above table shows that 75% of respondents. who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] are aware of various insurance schemes offered by the company. who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME].11 CHART SHOWING AWARENESS AMONGST [COMPANY NAME] CUSTOMERS TOWARDS THE INSURANCE SCHEMES OFFERED BY [COMPANY NAME] 25 Yes No 75 INTERVAL ESTIMATION: AWARENESS AMONGST [COMPANY NAME] CUSTOMERS TOWARDS THE INSURANCE SCHEMES OFFERED BY [COMPANY NAME] .2.No 1 2 Awareness Yes No Total No. have stated that they are aware of various insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME] and the rest 25% of respondents who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] have stated that they are not aware of all the insurance schemes offered by the company Inference: It is inferred that higher percentage (75%) of respondents. 3.S.

98% Conclusion Hence we conclude that the percentage of respondents aware of various insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME] lies between 64.64024>p>0.02% to 85.98% 3. Of Respondents Percentage (%) pq n .25 = 0.No Opinion No. of [COMPANY NAME] customers who are aware of various insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME]: 15 n = sample size = 60 p= Number of yes = 45 = .Formula: p ± Zα /2 pq n No.12 TABLE SHOWING RESPONDENT’S OPINION TOWARDS [COMPANY NAME]’S OFFERING OF CUSTOMER CENTRIC PRODUCTS S.96(0. of [COMPANY NAME] customers who are aware of various insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME]: 45 No.056 n 60 Interval estimation= p ± Zα / 2 = (0.25 Z α / 2 = 1.02%.75 Sample size 60 q = 1-p = 1-. 85.2.75 ± 1.96 at 95% confidence level __________ pq Standard error = = .056) = 0.75 * .75 = .8598 = 64.

3 3. who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] have agreed that [COMPANY NAME] is well known for offering customer centric products.3 80 8.3 100 Findings: The above table shows that 8.13 TABLE SHOWING THE RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE SERVICE OF [COMPANY NAME] S. Of Respondents 23 30 Percentage (%) 38.3 0 20 40 60 80 100 No. who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] highly agree.3 80 8.2.12 CHART SHOWING RESPONDENT’S AGREEMENT TOWARDS [COMPANY NAME]’S OFFERING OF CUSTOMER CENTRIC PRODUCTS Highly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Highly agree 0 3.3% of them disagree that [COMPANY NAME] is known for offering customer-centric products.33 50 . 3. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (80%) of respondents.3% of respondents. 80% of them just agree.of respondents 3.3 8.3% of them neither agree nor disagree and the rest 3. 8.No 1 2 Comment Excellent Very good No.1 2 3 4 5 Highly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Highly disagree Total 5 48 5 2 60 8.2.

Of Respondents 21 14 25 60 Percentage (%) 35 23.33 50 3.2. 3.67 100 . and 50% of them have stated it as very good and 11.3 4 5 Moderate Poor Very poor Total 7 60 11. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (50%) of respondents have indicated that the service rendered by [COMPANY NAME] as very good.67% of them have indicated it as moderate.33% of respondents have indicated the service of [COMPANY NAME] as excellent. TV) Insurance agents Friends & Relatives Others Total No.2. radio.67 10 0 Excellent Very good Moderate 0 Poor 0 Very poor 38.33 41.13 CHART SHOWING THE RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE SERVICE OF [COMPANY NAME] 60 50 No.67 100 Findings: The above table shows that 38.No 1 2 3 4 Source of information Ads (print.14 TABLE SHOWING SOURCES BY WHICH THE RESPONDENTS BECAME FAMILIAR OF [COMPANY NAME] S. of respondents 40 30 20 11.

radio.17 10.Findings: The above table shows that 35% of respondents have indicated advertisement. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (41.15 TABLE SHOWING THE PERIOD OF INSURANCE COVER HELD BY RESPONDENTS.67%) of respondents has indicated friends and relatives as means by which they came to know about [COMPANY NAME]. TV) 35% Insurance agents 23% 3.83 29.67% of them have indicated friends & relatives as means by which they came to know about [COMPANY NAME].33% of them have stated insurance agents and 41.2. Of Respondents 61 35 11 13 120 Percentage (%) 50.No 1 2 3 4 5 Period of insurance cover Annual policy 1-5 year 5-10 year 10-15 year Greater than 15 years Total No. 23.17 9.83 100 . S. 3.2.14 CHART SHOWING SOURCES BY WHICH THE RESPONDENTS BECAME FAMILIAR OF [COMPANY NAME] Others 0% Friends & Relatives 42% Ads (print.

83 9.25000 Total No. Of Respondents 43 58 12 7 120 Percentage (%) 35.15000-25000 Greater than Rs.17 29.330% of them have been paying premium between Rs.83% of respondents hold annual policy.No 1 2 3 4 Yearly premium paid Less than Rs.5000 Rs. 29. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (50.15000-25000 as .33 10 5.2.17 50.83 100 Findings: The above table shows that 35.5000-15000 Rs.83%) of respondents holds annual policy.83% of respondents have been paying insurance premium less than Rs.83% of them hold 10-15 year policy. period of insurance cover greater than 5 years 0 10-15 year 5-10 year 1-5 year Annual policy 0 10 20 30 40 50 10.5000 yearly.Findings: The above table shows that 50.2.17% of them hold 1-5 year policy cover. 48.of respondents 3. 10% of them have been paying between Rs.16 TABLE SHOWING THE AMOUNT OF YEARLY INSURANCE PREMIUM PAID S. 9% of them hold 5-10year policy and 10.83 60 No.83 48. 3.5000-15000 yearly.15 CHART SHOWING THE PERIOD OF INSURANCE COVER HELD BY RESPONDENTS.

83% of them have been paying more than Rs.2.25000 as yearly premium.5000-15000 3.3 3 35.16 CHART SHOWING THE AMOUNT OF YEARLY INSURANCE PREMIUM PAID Greater th an R s .5000 0 5.1 50 00-250 00 R s .2 50 00 Rs .50 00-150 00 Les s tha n R s . Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage of respondents (48.of res ponde nts .83 10 20 30 40 50 No.yearly premium and 5.83 10 48.3%) have been paying yearly insurance premium between Rs.

∑ y2 __ __ x = (X .2-5 lakhs 51 Rs.X) . y = (Y . of respondents Less than Rs.5000 43 Rs.15000 25000 12 More than Rs.20 lakhs 9 Premium amount (X) 43 58 12 7 0 Annual income (Y) 31 51 20 9 9 ∑ xy r = -------------------_________ √∑x2 . of respondents Less than Rs.Y) Premium (X) x x2 Annual income (Y) y y2 xy .5000 15000 58 Rs.2 lakhs 31 Rs.25000 7 Annual income No.APPLYING KARL PEARSON’S CORRELATION COEFFICIENT BY COMPARING ANNUAL INCOME AND THE YEARLY PREMIUM AMOUNT PAID Premium amount No.10-20 lakhs 9 Above Rs.5-10 lakhs 20 Rs.

43 58 12 7 0 ∑X = 120 13 28 -18 -23 0 169 784 324 529 0 ∑ x2= 1806 31 51 20 9 9 ∑ Y= 120 __ X = 120 = 30 4 __ Y = 120 = 24 5 7 27 -14 -15 -15 49 729 16 225 225 ∑ y2= 1244 91 756 72 345 0 ∑ xy = 1264 ∑ x2 = 1806 . .8433 Conclusion: The variables annual income and premium amount paid are positively correlated. ∑ y2 = 1244 . Hence. ∑ xy = 1264 1264 -------------------------_____________ √1806 * 1244 r= = . the annual income has an impact on the premium amount paid.

65 20 35 80 100 100 Findings: The above table shows that 65% of respondents. who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] have stated that the yearly premium paid. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (65%) of policy holders of [COMPANY NAME] feel that the premium paid is high and only 20% of policy holders of other companies have stated it is high 3.3. Of Respondents RSA Other co. who are policy holders with other companies 20% of them have stated that the yearly premium being paid is high and the rest 80% of them have stated that it is reasonable.17 TABLE SHOWING RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE YEARLY PREMIUM PAID S.2.17 CHART SHOWING RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE YEARLY PREMIUM PAID .No 1 2 3 4 5 Comment Very high High Reasonable Low Very low Total No. 39 12 21 48 60 60 Percentage (%) RSA Other Co. is high and the rest 35% of them have stated it is reasonable. Amongst the respondents.2.

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 very high 80 65 RS A Other Co. no. of respondents 35 20 high low APPLYING CHI-SQAURE TEST BY COMPARING THE PERIOD OF GENERAL INSURANCE COVER AND THE PREMIUM RANGE reasonable very low .

125 (Oi-Ei)2 0 1.156 1.525 0 35.675 5.325 7.875 20.766 (Oi-Ei)2/Ei 0 0.925 35.6 1.18 .Period of insurance cover Annual policy 1-5 yr 5-10 yr 10-15 yr >15 yr Total Ho: H1: Very high 0 0 0 0 0 0 High 27 10 7 7 0 51 Premium range Reasonable Low 34 25 4 6 0 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 Very low 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 61 35 11 13 0 120 There is no significant difference between premium and period of general insurance insurance policy policy There is a significant difference between premium and period of general Table of expected frequency: Expected Value = row total * column total Grand total 0 0 0 0 0 Formulae: 25.0446 .075 20.875 4.125 6.925 14.075 0 0 0 14.033 0 0 0 1.156 0 0 0 23.766 23.475 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 χ² = ∑ [(Oi – Ei) 2] with n-1 degrees of freedom i =1 Ei Oi 0 27 34 0 0 0 10 25 Ei 0 25.

05 with (n-1) (n-1) = (5-1) (5-1) = 16 χ²0.291 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.675 6.406 5.406 0 0 0 2.3 χ²cal < χ²0.855 0 0 0 .1564 .525 7.325 0 0 0 5.05 Hence.394 .05 with 16 d.f = 26.176 2.176 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.475 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 5.554 χ²0. .554 χ²cal = 5.0 0 0 7 4 0 0 0 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4. we accept ho Conclusion: We conclude that there is no significant difference between premium and period of general insurance policy.

18 TABLE SHOWING THE SATISFACTORY LEVEL OF RESPONDENTS TOWARDS THE POLICY TAKEN S.3% of them are highly satisfied and the rest 3. Of Respondents RSA Other cos.3 78.3% of them are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with the policy taken.No 1 2 3 4 5 Satisfactory level Highly satisfactory Satisfactory Neither satisfactory nor dissatisfactory Dissatisfactory Highly dissatisfactory Total No. 78. 8 5 47 53 5 2 60 60 Percentage (%) RSA Other cos.3% of them are just satisfied and the rest 8.3 8. .3 8.3% of them are highly satisfied.3 3. 8. 13. 88.3 88.2. Among policy holders of other companies.3 100 100 Findings: The above table shows that among policy holders of [COMPANY NAME] 13.3% of them are highly satisfied with the policy taken.3.35% of them are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with the policy taken.

Among other policy holders. a higher percentage (88.3 0 0 dissatisfactory 0 0 highly dissatisfactory highly satisfactory neither satisfactory nor dissatisfactory .3% of them are highly satisfied with the policy taken.2.3 78. 3.3 satisfactory 8. of respondents 88.3 3. 13.3%) of them also feels that they are satisfied and 8.3% of them feel that they are highly satisfied with the policy taken.3 8.3 RSA Other Co. higher percentage (78.Inference: It is inferred that among the policy holders of Royal Sundarm.3%) of them feel that they are satisfied and 13.18 CHART SHOWING THE SATISFACTORY LEVEL OF RESPONDENTS TOWARDS THE POLICY TAKEN 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 no.

500015000 Rs.5000 Rs.APPLYING CHI-SQUARE TEST BY COMPARING SATISFACTORY LEVEL TOWARDS GENERAL INSURANCE POLICY TAKEN AND THE YEARLY PREMIUM PAID Satisfactory level towards General insurance policy Satisfactory Neither Dissatisfactory Highly satisfactory nor Less than Rs.1500025000 More than Rs.25000 Total Ho: H1: 3 0 7 3 13 38 57 3 2 100 dissatisfactory 2 1 2 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 58 12 7 120 dissatisfactory Premium amount Highly satisfactory Total There is no significant difference between yearly premium paid and satisfactory level towards general insurance policy taken There is a significant difference between yearly premium paid and satisfactory level towards general insurance policy taken .

5335 0 0 (Oi-Ei)2/Ei 0.7583 5.725 0 0 5.9 53.283 1.383 0 0 1.69 5.7089 0.283 48.4083 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 χ²cal = 108.5083 0 0 6.3 3.48 75.Table of expected frequency: Expected Value = row total * column total Grand total 4.83 2.813 .75 4.3 10 5.83 48.63 2.383 .5903 0.57 1.83 .68 0 0 32.83 2.7583 Formulae: χ² = ∑ [(Oi – Ei) 2] with n-1 degrees of freedom i =1 Ei Oi 3 38 2 0 0 0 57 1 0 0 7 3 2 0 0 3 2 2 0 0 Ei 4.49 49 3.07 0 0 .68 0 0 24.1314 0.214 0 0 6.283 1.5083 3.813 35.07 .3 .205 0 0 108.025 14.2584 0 0 39.1030 0 0 6.6583 35.99 4.3 10 .67 2.4083 0 0 Total (Oi-Ei)2 2.5163 6.6583 6.

χ²0.2.19 TABLE SHOWING NO. we reject ho Conclusion: We conclude that there is a significant difference between yearly premium paid and satisfactory level towards general insurance policy taken. 3.0 χ²cal > χ²0.f = 21.05 with 12 d.OF RESPONDENTS HAVING INSURANCE AGENTS .05 Hence.05 with (n-1) (n-1) = (5-1) (4-1) = 12 χ²0.

Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (51.OF RESPONDENTS HAVING INSURANCE AGENTS 51.33 48.67% of respondents among both [COMPANY NAME] and other companies have insurance agents and the rest 48.No 1 2 Opinion Yes No Total No. 3.67 51. 31 31 29 29 60 60 Percentage (%) RSA Other co.19 CHART SHOWING NO. Of Respondents RSA Other co.67 INTERVAL ESTIMATION: RESPONDENTS HAVING INSURANCE AGENTS Formula: .33 100 100 Findings: The above table shows that 51. 51.33 RSA Other companies 51.of respondents 50 49 48 47 46 yes no 48.2.S.67 52 51 No.67 48.33 48.33% of respondents among both [COMPANY NAME] and other companies do not have an insurance agent.67%) of respondents among both [COMPANY NAME] and other companies has insurance agents.

4272>p>0.p ± Zα /2 pq n No.20 TABLE SHOWING RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE GUIDANCE RENDERED BY INSURANCE AGENTS S.No Comment No.2.72%. of respondents not having insurance agents: 58 n = sample size = 120 p= Number of yes = 62 = .0456) = 0. Percentage (%) RSA Other cos. . 60.0456 n 120 Interval estimation= p ± Zα / 2 = (0.5166 * .96(0.5166 ± 1.96 at 95% confidence level ______________ pq Standard error = = .4834 = 0.606 = 42. Of Respondents RSA Other cos.72% to 60.6% pq n 3.5166 Sample size 120 q = 1-p = 1-.6% Conclusion Hence we conclude that the percentage of respondents having insurance agents lies between 42. of respondents having insurance agents: 62 No.4834 Z α / 2 = 1.5166 = .

7 100 6.6%) have indicated that the guidance rendered by their insurance agent is very good. 64.8 64.5% of respondents among other companies have indicated that the guidance rendered by their insurance agent is excellent.6 41.5% of respondents among [COMPANY NAME] and 51.2.5 9.7% of respondents from [COMPANY NAME] and 41. 3.6% of respondents of other companies have indicated that it is very good and the rest 9.9 100 Findings: The above table shows that 25.8% of respondents among [COMPANY NAME] and 6.5 51. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage of respondents from both [COMPANY NAME] (64.9% of respondents from other companies have indicated that it is moderate.5%) and from other companies (51.1 2 3 4 5 Excellent Very good Moderate Poor Very poor Total 8 20 3 31 2 16 13 31 25.20 CHART SHOWING RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE GUIDANCE RENDERED BY INSURANCE AGENTS .

6 41.2.8 64.21 TABLE SHOWING THE CLAIMS REJECTED BY THE INSURANCE COMPANIES .5 0 OTHER CO. 0 Very poor 3.of respondents 50 40 30 20 10 0 25.7 0 0 RSA 6.5 51.70 60 No.9 Excellent Very good Moderate Poor 9.

60 60 60 60 Percentage (%) RSA Other cos.of respondents RSA Other companies 0 yes no 0 3.No 1 2 Claims rejected by insurance companies Yes No Total No. who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] and 100% respondents.S. Of Respondents RSA Other cos. 100 100 100 100 Findings: The above table shows that 100% of respondents.2. who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] as well with other companies have indicated that their claims were not rejected by the insurance companies.21 CHART SHOWING THE CLAIMS REJECTED BY THE INSURANCE COMPANIES 100 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 No. Inference: It is inferred that all the respondents. who are policy holders with other companies have stated that their claims were not rejected by the insurance companies. 3.2.22 TABLE SHOWING FACTORS THAT INFLUENCES CUSTOMERS TO CHOOSE A PARTICULAR COMPANY IN BUYING AN INSURANCE POLICY .

A 24.17 18.94 3.7 10.53 RANK 1 2 7 4 5 6 3 8 Formulae: Average score = [(R1*8 + R2*7 + R3*6 + R4*5 + R5*4 + R6*3 +R7*2 + R8*1)] Total weights Sample calculation: Average score = [(85*8 + 17*7 + 9*6 +5*5 + 0*4 + 1*3 + 2*2 + 1*1)] 36 = 24.5 15.306 12.14 15.Influencing factors Reputation Excellent service/Responsiveness Easy accessibility Good schemes Low premium rates Heard of good experience of others Proper claim settlement Others Rank 1 85 16 3 6 11 12 - Rank 2 17 68 3 7 7 3 14 - Rank 3 9 12 2 19 14 17 50 - Rank 4 5 14 8 30 24 6 23 - Rank 5 5 17 41 48 4 13 - Rank 6 1 4 44 17 16 23 5 - Rank 7 2 1 46 3 5 56 3 7 Rank 8 1 113 APPLYING WEIGHTED AVERAGE METHOD Influencing factors Reputation Excellent service/Responsiveness Easy accessibility Good schemes Low premium rates Heard of good experience of others Proper claim settlement Others 8 1 85 16 3 6 11 12 7 2 17 68 3 7 7 3 14 6 3 9 12 2 19 14 17 50 5 4 5 14 8 30 24 6 23 4 5 5 17 41 48 4 13 3 6 1 4 44 17 16 23 5 2 7 2 1 46 3 5 56 3 7 1 8 1 113 W.61 21.61 .

61 21. and easy accessibility.94 0 Reputation Heard of good experience of others Proper claim settlement Easy accessibility Good schemes Low premium rates 3.Findings: The above table clearly shows that while selecting a particular insurance company to take a policy. thirdly proper claim settlement of the company followed by good schemes.22 CHART SHOWING FACTORS THAT INFLUENCES CUSTOMERS TO CHOOSE A PARTICULAR COMPANY IN BUYING AN INSURANCE POLICY 30 No.2.7 15.14 15. secondly they look out for excellent service/responsiveness of the company. majority of the respondents look out for reputation of the company first. low premium rates.306 12.23 TABLE SHOWING RESPONDENT’S SATISFACTORY LEVEL TOWARDS VARIOUS FEATURES OF GENERAL INSURANCE POLICY TAKEN S.2.No Attributes of general insurance cover Highly satisfied Satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Dissatisfied Highly dissatisfied Total Others . Hence it is ranked first. Inference: It is inferred that majority of respondents would first look out for the reputation of the company. others good experience.53 Excellent service/Responsiveness 18.5 10.17 3. 3.of respondents 25 20 15 10 5 24.

23 CHART SHOWING RESPONDENT’S SATISFACTORY LEVEL TOWARDS VARIOUS FEATURES OF GENERAL INSURANCE POLICY TAKEN .1 2 3 4 5 Low premium Claim settlement Larger risk coverage Money back guarantee Easy access to agents Total 9 26 21 7 21 84 92 86 83 41 39 341 9 7 13 62 58 149 10 1 3 10 2 26 - 120 120 120 120 0 120 600 3.2.

of respondents 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 92 86 83 Highly satisfied 62 58 Satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Dissatisfied Highly dissatisfied 20 Easy access to agents 41 26 21 9 910 0 Low premium 39 21 13 7 10 Claim settlement 3 7 0 10 0 APPLYING KRUSKAL – WALLIS OR H – TEST TO THE TABLE 3.2.23 Ho: Respondent’s satisfaction level towards all the attributes of general insurance cover Money back guarantee Larger risk coverage .100 90 80 no.

49 χ²0.5 1 Ranks of larger risk coverage (R3) 11.5 R1 = 41.52/4 + 37.5 37.05 = 9.49 .5 .f = 9.5 11. R2 = 37. R5 = 43.5 10 11.52/4 + 42.52/4 + 462/4 + 43.5 Applying the formula for H: 46 43.5 Ranks of easy access to agents (R5) 11.5 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Total 41.75) – 63 H = . R3 = 42.5 H = [12 / (N (N+1)) * (R12/ n1 + R22 / n2 + R32 / n3 + R42 / n4 + R52 / n5)] – 3 (n + 1) H = [12 / (20 (20+1)) * (41.5 8.52/4)] – 3 (20+1) = [(12/420) * (2235. R4 = 46 .5 15 17 8.5 8.taken is the same H1: Respondent’s satisfaction level towards all the attributes of general insurance cover taken is not the same.5 .5 6.5 6.5 42.5 18 10 3 Ranks of money back guarantee (R4) 5. Values Ranks Ranks of low premium (R1) 6.5 Ranks of claim settlement (R2) 13 19 4.5 20 6.5 14 16 2 1 2 3 7 7 9 9 10 10 13 21 21 26 39 41 58 62 83 86 92 1 2 3 4.5 4.5 8.5 .8786 At 5% level of significance with (5-1) d.

67 35 2.No 1 2 3 4 Preferred source of information Ads (print. Of Respondents 31 44 42 3 120 Percentage (%) 25.49 We accept Ho.2.24 TABLE SHOWING THE SOURCES MOST PREFERRED BY RESPONDENTS TO KNOW ABOUT INSURANCE COMPANY AND ITS PRODUCTS S.8786 < 9. 35% of them prefer Friends & relatives. 0. Conclusion Hence.5 100 Findings: The above table shows that 25.83 36.83% of respondents would prefer Ads. we conclude that the respondent’s satisfaction level towards all the attributes of general insurance cover taken is the same. 36.Since. 3. radio & TV) Insurance agents Friends & Relatives Others Total No. and the rest .67% of them prefer insurance agents.

of respondents 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Ads (print.2. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage of respondents (36.25 TABLE SHOWING GENERAL INSURANCE COVER THAT IS MOST FAVORED BY RESPONDENTS .2.83 36.67 35 2. SMS.5% of them would prefer other sources like company websites. etc. radio & TV) 25.5 Insurance agents Friends & Relatives Others 3. in order to know about an insurance company and its products. 3.2.24 CHART SHOWING THE SOURCES MOST PREFERRED BY RESPONDENTS TO KNOW ABOUT INSURANCE COMPANY AND ITS PRODUCTS 40 35 No.67%) have stated insurance agents as the most preferred source.

25 .Most favored insurance cover Auto/car insurance Health insurance Hospital cash insurance Personal accident insurance Travel insurance Householder’s insurance Shopkeeper’s insurance Others Rank 1 85 34 2 1 - Rank 2 15 64 29 7 4 - Rank 3 4 9 65 38 5 - Rank 4 16 13 17 65 5 3 - Rank 5 4 4 22 77 11 16 Rank 6 2 6 53 35 24 - Rank 7 1 37 1 72 7 Rank 8 2 8 97 APPLYING WEIGHTED AVERAGE METHOD TO THE TABLE 3.2.

9 12.25 4. householder’s insurance.72 8.A 24. travel insurance.306 19.Most favored insurance cover Auto/car insurance Health insurance Hospital cash insurance Personal accident insurance Travel insurance Householder’s insurance Shopkeeper’s insurance Others 8 1 85 34 2 1 - 7 2 15 64 29 7 4 - 6 3 4 9 65 38 5 - 5 4 16 13 17 65 5 3 - 4 5 4 4 22 77 11 16 3 6 2 6 53 35 24 - 2 7 1 37 1 72 7 1 8 2 7 92 W. hospital cash insurance ranked III followed by personal accident insurance.7 23.7 Findings: The above table clearly shows that auto/car insurance is been ranked I by majority of respondents. health insurance ranked II.94 17.67 9. .72 RANK 1 2 3 4 6 5 7 8 Formulae: Average score = [(R1*8 + R2*7 + R3*6 + R4*5 + R5*4 + R6*3 +R7*2 + R8*1)] Total weights Sample calculation: Average score = [(85*8 + 15*7 + 4*6 + 16*5 + 0*4 + 0*3 + 0*2 + 0*1)] 36 = 24.

V. Inference: It is inferred that auto/car insurance is the most favored insurance cover among majority of respondents.72 3.94 17.7 23. marine.306 19.shopkeeper’s insurance and other insurance (fire insurance.2.3 FINDINGS .25 CHART SHOWING GENERAL INSURANCE COVER THAT IS MOST FAVORED BY RESPONDENTS 30 25 No. VI.25 4.of respondents 20 15 10 5 0 Hospital cash insurance Travel insurance Auto/car insurance Health insurance Personal accident insurance Householder’s insurance Shopkeeper’s insurance Others 9.67 12. rural insurance. etc) which are ranked as IV. VII and VIII respectively.9 24.72 8. 3.

From the analysis made it is inferred that the percentage of respondents who have taken policies from the same company lies between 46.         .30.83%) of respondents in the age group of less than 25 years and comparatively very lower percentage (i.5%) of male respondents among the respondents who has taken general insurance cover. 35.83%) of respondents have 2-4 members in their family.e. The study discloses that 55% of respondents hold general insurance policy with the same company and the rest 45% of respondents hold it in various other companies.5%) of respondents in the income category of 10-20 lakhs and above 20 lakhs It is implied that all the respondents surveyed have stated that it is necessary to have a general insurance cover.e. 67.9%.67%) of the respondents holds at least 1 general insurance policy. who has taken general insurance cover are private sector employees. It is found that there is a higher percentage (i.e. There is a higher percentage (i. 10%) of respondent belongs to the age group of 45-55 years. Majority of the respondents (i. It is found that a higher percentage (75. It is evident from the study conducted that majority (51.1% and 63.5%) of respondents in the income category of 2-5 lakhs and comparatively a very lower percentage (7.83%).e. It is inferred that there is a higher percentage (42.

who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] have agreed that [COMPANY NAME] is well known for offering customer centric products.17% of respondents stating it.67%) of respondents has indicated friends and relatives. who has taken general insurance cover it is inferred that a higher percentage (50.98% Majority of respondents (i. while 38.52% of respondents are policy holders in 2-5 companies and the rest 1. 75%). Majority of respondents (i.        .85% of respondents are policy holders in more than 5 companies.67% of them have indicated it as moderate. It is inferred that a higher percentage of respondents (79.e. It is inferred that higher reputation amidst customers is enjoyed by [COMPANY NAME] with 39.. It is inferred that a higher percentage (50%) of respondents have indicated that the service rendered by [COMPANY NAME] as very good. while 35% of respondents have indicated advertisement and the rest 23.33% of respondents have indicated the service of [COMPANY NAME] as excellent.33% of them have stated insurance agents as means by which they came to know about [COMPANY NAME] Among the respondents. The study implies that a higher percentage (41.63%) are policy holders in at least 2 companies.83%) of respondents holds annual policy.e. It is found that the percentage of respondents aware of various insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME] lies between 64. while18.02% and 85.. who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] have stated that they are aware of various insurance schemes offered by the company. and the rest 11. 80%).

Among the policy holders of [COMPANY NAME]. It is found that the percentage of respondents having insurance agents lies between 42. according to the analysis conducted        . 65% of them feel that the premium being paid is high and among the policy holders of other companies only 20% have stated it as high. higher percentage (78.3%) have been paying yearly insurance premium between Rs.3% of them feel that they are highly satisfied with the policy taken. it is found that there is no significant difference between premium and period of general insurance policy. It is inferred from the study that among the policy holders of Royal Sundarm. According to the chi – square test conducted.3%) of them also feels that they are satisfied and 8.3% of them are highly satisfied with the policy taken. a higher percentage (88. The study conducted reveals that a higher percentage (51. who are holding general insurance cover it is found that a higher percentage of respondents (48.6%.5000-15000 With the application of Karl Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient it is found that the variables annual income and premium amount paid are positively correlated. as per the chi-square test conducted. Among the respondents.3%) of them feel that they are satisfied and 13.72% and 60. Among other policy holders.67%) of policy holders among both [COMPANY NAME] and other companies has insurance agents. It is found that there is a significant difference between yearly premium paid and satisfactory level towards general insurance policy taken.

travel insurance. shopkeeper’s insurance and other insurance covers (fire insurance. VII and VIII respectively. It is found that a higher percentage of respondents from both [COMPANY NAME] (64. It is inferred that all the respondents. thirdly proper claim settlement of the company followed by good schemes. it is found that the respondent’s satisfaction level towards all the attributes of general insurance cover taken is the same. secondly they look out for excellent service/responsiveness of the company. majority of the respondents look out for reputation of the company first. low premium rates.5%) and from other companies (51. hospital cash insurance ranked III followed by personal accident insurance. householder’s insurance.67%) have stated insurance agents as the most preferred source to know about an insurance company and its products. etc) which are ranked as IV. According to the result of the H-test. rural insurance. It is found that while selecting a particular insurance company to take a policy. and easy accessibility.6%) have indicated that the guidance rendered by their insurance agent is very good.4 SUGGESTIONS . Majority of respondents (36. marine. who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] as well with other companies have indicated that their claims were not rejected by the insurance companies. VI.      3. It is found that auto/car insurance is been ranked I by majority of respondents. health insurance ranked II. V. others good experience.

as well as build trust in the minds of the customers. The present scenario demands almost all the customers to have a general insurance cover in order to protect from future uncertainty.    3. Majority of the respondents have preference towards auto/car insurance as it is a must to have insurance for their vehicles by law. The promptness of claim settlement procedure can be maintained as it is one of the important aspects which would enhance the reputation of the company. Also. Therefore. Hence. The company always has an opportunity to grow and expand its operations in the non-life insurance segment. the company has got enough opportunities to earn huge profits from both these segments. the company can seize this opportunity and pay attention to introduce more insurance covers to cater to the needs of various classes of people. The company has to focus more on the auto/car insurance segment and health insurance segment. The company can create more awareness about its products among potential customers by means of advertisements and efficient insurance agents.  Majority of the respondents. who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] have felt that the premium being paid is comparatively higher with the premium rates of other insurance companies. which in turn will help in increasing its customer base. it helps to retain existing customers and attract new customers.5 CONCLUSIONS . amendments can be made in this regard by offering insurance cover at reasonable premium rates to the customers. Hence.

The outcome of the study has proved that the performance of the company is outstanding in comparison with other competitors in the non-life insurance segment and that the company has a higher reputation among customers. by thoroughly analyzing and identifying the competitive position of [COMPANY NAME]. can further improve its performance and occupy a leading position among other competitors in the non-life insurance market in future years to come. if not all. strengths and weaknesses of various insurance covers among the clients of various insurance companies. The company may highly be benefited by the outcome of this study. .The study was conducted to compare the performance of [COMPANY NAME] with its industrial competitors. The company by adopting some of the recommendations. customer’s awareness and perception about the company and its products. It is concluded that the company could initiate various steps based on the recommendations given in this report. The study has been able to accomplish its objectives.