“A STUDY ON JOB SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES IN CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE LIMITED CHENNAI”

MAJOR PROJECT REPORT Submitted by

R.MUTHUKUMAR 06BA078
Under the guidance of

Mr. BRIGHTON ANBU
Lecturer KSM

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of ” MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION” of Karunya university

KARUNYA SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT KARUNYA UNIVERSITY COIMBATORE-641114

KARUNYA SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT KARUNYA UNIVERSITY

DECLARATION

I hereby declare, the project work entitled “A STUDY ON JOB SATISFACTION IN CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE LIMITED, CHENNAI” for partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of “MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION”, as a record of original work done by me under the supervision and guidance of Mr. BRIGHTON ANBU, Karunya school of management, Karunya university, COIMBATORE. This project work has not formed the basis for the award of any Degree /Diploma/Associateship/Fellowship of similar titles to any candidate of any university.

Place: Date:

Signature of the student

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I am indebted to the all powerful ALMIGHTY GOD for all the blessings he showered on me and for being with me throughout the study. I would like to express my sincere thanks to Mr. Dr. REVEES WESLY, HOS Karunya School of management who provided me an opportunity to do this project. I am deeply obliged to Mr. RAYMOND LOBO (VICE PRESIDENT-HR) AND MS. MALINI (HR-MANAGER) for his exemplary guidance and support without whose help this project would not have been success. I would like to place on record my sincere gratitude and appreciation to my project guide Mr. BRIGHTON ANBU Karunya school of management, for his kind cooperation and guidance which enabled me to complete my project. I also take this opportunity to express my deed gratitude to my loving parents and

friends who are a constant source of motivation and for their never ending support and
encouragement during this project.

S.No

Title of the Table

Page No

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

Table showing gender of the respondents Table showing monthly income of the respondents Table showing Education qualification of the respondents Table showing marital status of the respondents Table showing Years of experience of the respondents Table showing Working hours are convenient for me of the employees Table showing I’m happy with the work place of the respondents Table showing the lightings and other arrangements in the office are satisfactory of the respondents Table showing I have too much work to do of the respondents Table showing safety measures provided by the company of the respondents Table showing My relationship with my supervisors is cordial of the respondents Table showing my supervisor in not partial of the respondents Table showing my supervisor considers my idea too while taking decision of the respondents Table showing I’m satisfied with the support from my co-workers of the respondents Table showing People here have concern over one another and tend to help one another of the respondents Table showing I’m happy with the refreshment facilities of the respondents Table showing we are provided with the rest and lunch room facilities and they are good of the respondents

18. 19. 20 21 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29 30 31 32 33 34

Table showing the parking space for our facilities of the respondents Table showing I’m satisfied with the first aid facilities of the respondents. Table showing I’m satisfied with the loan facilities and other personal welfare facilities offered by the company of the respondents Table showing I feel I’m paid a fair amount for the work I do of the respondents Tale showing I’m satisfied with the chances for my promotion of the respondents. Table showing the salary we receive are good as other organizations offer of the respondents Table showing I’m satisfied with the allowances provided by the organization of the respondents Table showing I feel my boss motivates me to achieve the organizational goals of the respondents Table showing my supervisor motivates me to increase my productivity when I’m unproductive of the respondents. Table showing communication seems good within this organization of the respondents Table showing work assignments are explained clearly to me of the respondents Table showing I love this job and to work in this organization of the respondents. Table showing My work life is meaningful to me of the respondents Table showing my work life is valuable in attaining organizational goals of the respondents Table showing I have adequate opportunities to use my ability of the respondents Table showing overall I’m satisfied with the job of the respondents Table showing the significance difference among experience group of respondents with reference to environment and nature of work factor

35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41.

Table showing the significance difference among experience group of respondents with reference to Relationship with supervisors and colleagues factor Table showing the significance difference among experience group of respondents with reference to welfare facilities factor Table showing the significance difference among experience group of respondents with reference to Pay and promotion factor Table showing the significance difference among experience group of respondents with reference to Communication and motivation factor Table showing the significance difference among experience group of respondents with reference to job factor. Table showing the significance difference among Age group of respondents with reference to job factor. Table showing the significance difference among Gender of respondents with reference to job factor.

S.No

Title of the Chart

Page No

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

Chart showing gender of the respondents Chart showing monthly income of the respondents Chart showing Education qualification of the respondents Chart showing marital status of the respondents Chart showing Years of experience of the respondents Chart showing Working hours are convenient for me of the employees Chart showing I’m happy with the work place of the respondents Chart showing the lightings and other arrangements in the office are satisfactory of the respondents Chart showing I have too much work to do of the respondents Chart showing safety measures provided by the company of the respondents Chart showing My relationship with my supervisors is cordial of the respondents Chart showing my supervisor in not partial of the respondents Chart showing my supervisor considers my idea too while taking decision of the respondents Chart showing I’m satisfied with the support from my co-workers of the respondents Chart showing People here have concern over one another and tend to help one another of the respondents Chart showing I’m happy with the refreshment facilities of the respondents Chart showing we are provided with the rest and lunch room facilities and they are good of the respondents

18. 19. 20 21 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29 30 31 32 33

Chart showing the parking space for our facilities of the respondents Chart showing I’m satisfied with the first aid facilities of the respondents. Chart showing I’m satisfied with the loan facilities and other personal welfare facilities offered by the company of the respondents Chart showing I feel I’m paid a fair amount for the work I do of the respondents Tale showing I’m satisfied with the chances for my promotion of the respondents. Chart showing the salary we receive are good as other organizations offer of the respondents Chart showing I’m satisfied with the allowances provided by the organization of the respondents Chart showing I feel my boss motivates me to achieve the organizational goals of the respondents Chart showing my supervisor motivates me to increase my productivity when I’m unproductive of the respondents. Chart showing communication seems good within this organization of the respondents Chart showing work assignments are explained clearly to me of the respondents Chart showing I love this job and to work in this organization of the respondents. Chart showing My work life is meaningful to me of the respondents Chart showing my work life is valuable in attaining organizational goals of the respondents Chart showing I have adequate opportunities to use my ability of the respondents Chart showing overall I’m satisfied with the job of the respondents

Chapter -I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Job Satisfaction: Job Satisfaction is the favorableness or un-favorableness with which the employee views his work. It expresses the amount of agreement between one’s expectation of the job and the rewards that the job provides. Job Satisfaction is a part of life satisfaction. The nature of one’s environment of job is an important part of life as Job Satisfaction influences one’s general life satisfaction.

Job Satisfaction, thus, is the result of various attitudes possessed by an employee. In a narrow sense, these attitudes are related to the job under condition with such specific factors such as wages. Supervisors of employment, conditions of work, social relation on the job, prompt settlement of grievances and fair treatment by employer.

However, more comprehensive approach requires that many factors are to be included before a complete understanding of job satisfaction can be obtained. Such factors as employee’s age, health temperature, desire and level of aspiration should be considered. Further his family relationship, Social status, recreational outlets, activity in the organizations etc. Contribute ultimately to job satisfaction.

1.2 FACTORS INFLUENCING JOB SATISFACTION

The major factors influencing job satisfaction are presented below:

SUPERVISION To a worker, Supervision is equally a strong contributor to the job satisfaction as well as to the job dissatisfaction. The feelings of workers towards his supervisors are usually similar to his feeling towards the company. The role of supervisor is a focal point for attitude formation. Bad supervision results in absenteeism and labor turnover. Good supervision results in higher production and good industrial relations.

CO-WORKERS Various studies had traced this factor as a factor of intermediate importance. One’s associates with others had frequently been motivated as a factor in job satisfaction. Certainly, this seems reasonable because people like to be near their friends. The workers derive satisfaction when the co-workers are helpful, friendly and co-operative.

PAY Studies also show that most of the workers felt satisfied when they are paid more adequately to the work performed by them. The relative important of pay would probably changing factor in job satisfaction or dissatisfaction. AGE Age has also been found to have a direct relationship to level job of satisfaction of employees. In some groups job satisfaction is higher with increasing age, in other groups job satisfaction is lower and in other there is no difference at all.

MARITAL STATUS Marital status has an important role in deciding the job satisfaction. Most of the studies have revealed that the married person finds dissatisfaction in his job than his unmarried counterpart. The reasons stated to be are that wages were insufficient due to increased cost of living, educations to children etc. EDUCATION Studies conducted among various workers revealed that most of workers who had not completed their school education showed higher satisfaction level. However, educated workers felt less satisfied in their job. WORKING CONDITION The result of various studies shows that working condition is an important factor. Good working atmosphere and pleasant surroundings help increasing the production of industry. Working conditions are more important to women workers than men workers.

1.3 REVIEW OF LITERATURE: JOB SATISFACTION OF BANK OFFICERS IN BANGLADESH

– Bangladesh.

by NAZRUL ISLAM & GOUR CHANDRA SAHA

This study attempts to evaluate job satisfaction of bank officers in It focuses on the relative importance of job satisfaction factors and their impacts on the overall job satisfaction of officers. It also investigates the impacts of bank type, work experience, age, and sex differences on the attitudes toward job Satisfaction. The result shows that salary, efficiency in work, fringe levels supervision, and co-worker relation are the most important factors contributing to job satisfaction. Private bank officers have higher of job satisfaction than those from public sectors as they enjoy better facilities and supportive work environment. Sex and age differences have relatively lower level of impact on it. The overall job satisfaction of the bank officers is at the positive level. Factors affecting Job satisfaction among academic professionals in tertiary institutions in Zimbabwe

– By P. Chimanikire, E. Mutandwa, C. T.
Gadzirayi, N. Muzondo and B. Mutandwa The broad objective of this study was to determine factors affecting job satisfaction among academic professionals in tertiary institutions of Zimbabwe against the backdrop of high brain drain in the sector. A total of eighty respondents were selected randomly from departmental lists and interviewed using structured questionnaires. The results of the study showed that a greater proportion of the academic staff was not satisfied with their jobs. Reasons for dissatisfaction include high volume of work, inadequate salaries, allowances, loans to facilities purchase of housing stands and cars.

1.4 Objective of the study:

1. To Study the job satisfaction of employees in Cholamandalam MS General Insurance, Chennai. 2. To Measure the satisfaction levels of employees on various factors and give suggestions for improving the same. 3. To find out whether experience have an effect on Job Factors. 4. To find the significance difference among age groups with respect to job Factors. 5. To find the significance difference among male and female employees with respect to job Factors.

1.5 Limitations of the study: 1. Sample size of the study is only 100. 2. Some of the respondents were not responding to some of the questions. 3. Due to time constraint the researcher was not able to complete the project to desired level.

INDUSTRY PROFILE

2.1 Industry

INSURANCE: We face a lot of risks in our daily lives. Some of these lead to financial losses. Insurance is a way of protecting against these financial losses. For a payment (premium), an insurance company will take the responsibility of compensating your financial losses. Insurance can be termed as a form of risk management which is mainly used to protect an individual against the risk of prospective financial loss, if any. Insurance can be used as a tool to shield an individual against potential risks like travel accidents, death, unemployment, theft, property destruction by natural calamities, fire mishaps etc.

Life insurance:
Loss of a family member is a catastrophe which glooms a family’s life. But even more tragic is the death of a sole bread earner for the family, who then has to go through the pain of losing their loved one, as well as the financial loss putting their survival in jeopardy. This financial hardship due to a sudden death of a family member or a disability resulting to a loss of job or inability to Work can be avoided to a great extent by taking up a life insurance policy. A Life insurance or disability insurance covers such losses and pays a family, compensation to restore the earnings lost by them due to a Sudden death or disability. The monthly premiums for a life insurance are generally based upon the

age, health, and occupation information of the applicant, in addition to the total benefits to be paid to him for his policy.

General Insurance:
Insurance other than ‘Life Insurance’ falls under the category of General Insurance. General Insurance comprises of insurance of property against fire, burglary etc, personal insurance such as Accident and Health Insurance, and liability insurance which covers legal liabilities. There are also other covers such as Errors and Omissions insurance for professionals, credit insurance etc. Non-life insurance companies have products that cover property against Fire and allied perils, flood storm and inundation, earthquake and so on. There are products that cover property against burglary, theft etc. The non-life companies also offer policies covering machinery against breakdown, there are policies that cover the hull of ships and so on. A Marine Cargo policy covers goods in transit including by sea, air and road. Further, insurance of motor vehicles against damages and theft forms a major chunk of non-life insurance business. In respect of insurance of property, it is important that the cover is taken for the actual value of the property to avoid being imposed a penalty should there be a claim. Where a property is undervalued for the purposes of insurance, the insured will have to bear a ratable proportion of the loss. For instance if the value of a property is Rs.100 and it is insured for Rs.50/-, in the event of a loss to the extent of say Rs.50/-, the maximum claim amount payable would be Rs.25/- (50% of the loss

being borne by the insured for underinsuring the property by 50%). This concept is quite often not understood by most insured. Personal insurance covers include policies for Accident, Health etc. Products offering Personal Accident cover are benefit policies. Health insurance covers offered by non-life insurers are mainly hospitalization covers either on reimbursement or cashless basis. The cashless service is offered through Third Party Administrators who have arrangements with various service providers, i.e., hospitals. The Third Party Administrators also provide service for reimbursement claims. Sometimes the insurers themselves process reimbursement claims. Accident and health insurance policies are available for individuals as well as groups. A group could be a group of employees of an organization or holders of credit cards or deposit holders in a bank etc. Normally when a group is covered, insurers offer group discounts. Liability insurance covers such as Motor Third Party Liability Insurance, Workmen’s Compensation Policy etc offer cover against legal liabilities that may arise under the respective statutes— Motor Vehicles Act, The Workmen’s Compensation Act etc. Some of the covers such as the foregoing (Motor Third Party and Workmen’s Compensation policy) are compulsory by statute. Liability Insurance not compulsory by statute is also gaining popularity these days. Many industries insure against Public liability. There are liability covers available for Products as well.

COMPANY PROFILE

2.2 The Murugappa Group:
The Murugappa Group, a century old group with a turnover of Rs.7300 crores, is a 1.85 billion USD conglomerate with business interests. It has 29 companies under its umbrella of which eight are listed and actively traded as the National Stock Exchange and the Bombay Stock Exchange. The Murugappa Group is the recipient of the Distinguished Family Business Award – 2001 from the International Institute of Management Development (IIMD) in Switzerland. It is the only business group in Asia to have received this prestigious award. The Murugappa Group, a century old group with a turnover of Rs.7300 crores.

Diversified plantations,

businesses sugar,

abrasives,

engineering,

farm

inputs, and

bio-products,

chemicals,

nutraceuticals

financial services.

Industry leader in many fields – first Indian corporate house that evolved from being a family-owned business to a professionally run organization, committed to corporate governance.

Key Strengths – highly people-oriented people, with a workforce of nearly 28,000 satisfied employees. Deeply committed to various social concerns – be it healthcare, education or field research to help rural India.

Group Companies
The Major group Companies are: Tube Investments of India Ltd.
Leading Brands – BSA and Hercules.
– Core business areas are in the

manufacturing of bicycles, steel strips tubing and auto components.

EID Parry India Ltd.

– The Company has interest in Sugar and bio-

chemicals. Erstwhile Sanitary ware division was recently spun off as Joint Venture with ROCA, Spain.

Carborundum Universal Ltd.

– A pioneer and industry leader in

abrasives, electro chemicals, refractories and industrial ceramics. Leading brands – Ball master, Ajax and Jawan.

Coromandel Fertilizers

– Bringing world-class technology to the

Indian farmer enabling him to produce more from small land holdings. Assisting India achieve self-sufficiency in food.

Godavari Fertilisers
Kakinada.

– Godavari Fertilizers, a Company acquired from

the Government of Andhra Pradesh manufacturers phosphatic fertilizers in

Chola DBS Finance Company LTd.

– Strong presence in the

financial service sector, with a solid reputation in automobile financing.

Parry Agro Industries Ltd. – Part of the Group’s plantation business,
has many firsts to its credit. It is the first tea factory in the world to be computerized and the first CTC factory to obtain the ISO 9000 certification.

Parry Nutraceuticals Ltd.
nutritional supplements.

– A major player in the field of healthcare.

Leading Brands - Beta Carotene and Spirulina, both highly successful

Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Group
Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Group is one of the largest insurance groups in the world. Today the group operates in non-life insurance, life insurance, financial services and risk management services. With non-life insurance as its core business, the Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Groups operations span 38 countries across the globe. With A GWP of 13.74 billion USD in 2005, MS is the second largest insurance group in Japan, in terms of net premium and is rated AA – Standard & Poor and Aa3 by Moody’s Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance has 733 sales bases, 257 claims handling offices and approximately 75,000 agents throughout Japan to form a sales network of the highest class in the industry. The company also offers global services with 61 sales bases in 38 countries and regions overseas.

Cholamandalam Financial Services Group
Chola DBS Finance Company LTd. is a financial service conglomerate that has achieved a high compound annual growth rate. Cholamandalam today has a strong presence in the financial service sector, with a solid reputation in automobile financing. With a strong focus on growth, Cholamandalam has widened its services by diversifying into mutual funds, insurance sector and recently into personal finance.

The Business Units
The business units within Cholamandalam are: • • Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Ltd. (General Insurance ) Chola DBS Finance Company Ltd (CDFL)

(Asset Finance: Leasing, Hire purchase, Corporate Finance, Capital market Finance) • DBS Cholamandalam Asset Management Co. Ltd. (CAMC)

(Mutual Funds) • DBS Cholamandalam Distribution Services Ltd. (CDS)

(Retail Distribution of Financial Products) • • DBS Cholamandalam Securities Ltd. (CSec)(Stock Broking) Cholamandalam MS Risk Management Services Ltd. (CMSRS)(Risk Inspection and Management Consulting)

Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Ltd:
Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Ltd. is a Joint Venture between the $2.0 billion Murugappa Group, one of India’s largest familypromoted, professionally managed business groups enjoying leadership position in many of its several diversified businesses and Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Group of Japan, one of the top ten General Insurance companies globally and Japans second largest Insurance Group. Cholamandalam MS offers a rich range of comprehensive product solutions panning almost all non-life Insurance offerings ranging from Motor Insurance, Health, Home, Travel, to Accident, Property, Marine and Engineering. The Organizations’ commitment to consumer orientation is seen right from Underwriting and product development, its product differentiation, high operational efficiency for policy issuances, to excellent customer redressal mechanisms for fair and quick Claims settlement. With its competencies and consumer focus, Cholamandalam MS is poised to become one of the large players in the Industry. The company was incorporated as Cholamandalam General Insurance Company Limited on November 2, 2001 under the companies Act, 1956 and received its Certificate of Registration from the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority on July 15, 2002 to transact general insurance business. During the year 2003-2004 the company inducted Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Company Limited, Japan as a strategic alliance partner with a 26% stake and the company’s name was consequently changed to

Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited effective May 8, 2003. Board of Directors M A Alagappan Chairman M Anandan Managing Director (w.e.f. April 1, 2006) V Natarajan Director R Srinivasan Director Suresh N Talwar Director Makoto Toyoshima Director Isamu Endo Director (w.e.f. April 25, 2006) Susumu Uchida Director (till April 25, 2006) Junichi Kitamura Wholetime Director Senior Management Team M Anandan Managing Director Junichi Kitamura Wholetime Director S S Gopalarathnam Executive Vice President V Suryanarayanan Vice President -Finance Shivkumar Shankar Business Head-Retail M Subramanian Business Head-Commercial S N Roy Head-Information Technology Kaira Gangaiah Head-Human Resources Suresh Krishnan Company Secretary

Auditors M/s. Price Waterhouse, Chennai M/s. S.B. Billimoria & Co., Chennai Bankers Standard Chartered Bank, Chennai Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation, Chennai HDFC Bank Ltd., Chennai ICICI Bank Ltd., Chennai Bank of Tokyo- Mitsubishi Ltd., Chennai American Express Bank Ltd., Chennai

CHAPTER – III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
The methodology followed for conducting the study includes the specification of research design, sample design, questionnaire design, data collection and statistical tools used for analyzing the collected data.

3.1 Research design:
The research design used for this study is of the descriptive type. Descriptive research studies are those studies which are concerned with describing the characteristics of a particular individual or a group. .

3.2 Sample size:
The sample size consisting of 100 respondents were selected for the study.

3.3 Sampling design:
Since it is difficult to contact the entire population, sampling technique was adopted. The employees were interviewed using convenience sampling techniques.

\

3.4 Questionnaire design:
Questionnaire was designed in consultation with the experts of Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company in such a manner that it would facilitate the respondents to reveal maximum information.

3.5 Data collection
The primary data was collected by using questionnaires. The questionnaire has 28 questions excluding marital status, age, factor prompted to join reliance. A five point scale was used such as strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree and strongly agree.

3.6 Statistical tools used for analysis:
The collected data were analyzed by using following techniques:

• •

Percentage analysis One-way ANOVA

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

Chapter -IV Table no: 1
Ge nde r Frequency 74 26 100 Percent 74.0 26.0 100.0 Valid Percent 74.0 26.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 74.0 100.0

Valid

male female Total

Chart no: 1
Gender
80

60

40

Frequency

20

0 male female

Gender

Table no: 2

M onthly AIncome Frequency below rs.10000 8 10000-20000 45 20000-30000 31 above 30000 16 Total 100 Percent 8.0 45.0 31.0 16.0 100.0 Valid Percent 8.0 45.0 31.0 16.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 8.0 53.0 84.0 100.0

Valid

Chart no: 2

Monthly AIncome
50

40

30

20

Frequency

10

0 below rs.10000 10000-20000 20000-30000 above 30000

Monthly AIncome

Table No: 3

Education qualification Frequency 46 54 100 Percent 46.0 54.0 100.0 Valid Percent 46.0 54.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 46.0 100.0

Valid

P.G U.G Total

Chart No: 3
Education qualification
60

50

40

30

Frequency

20

10

0 P.G U.G

Education qualification

Tale No: 4
M arital Status Frequency 55 45 100 Percent 55.0 45.0 100.0 Valid Percent 55.0 45.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 55.0 100.0

Valid

married Unmarried Total

Chart no: 4

Marital Status
60

50

40

30

Frequency

20

10

0 m arried Unm arried

Marital Status

Table No: 5

Ye ars of Expe rie nce Frequency Less than 1yr 8 1-2 yrs 26 2-3yrs 20 3-4yrs 26 Above 4yrs 20 Total 100 Percent 8.0 26.0 20.0 26.0 20.0 100.0 Valid Percent 8.0 26.0 20.0 26.0 20.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 8.0 34.0 54.0 80.0 100.0

Valid

Chart Mo: 5

Years of Experience
30

20

Frequency

10

0 Less than 1yr 1-2 yrs 2-3yrs 3-4yrs Above 4yrs

Years of Experience

Table No: 6

Working hours are convenient for me Frequency 34 32 18 13 3 100 Percent 34.0 32.0 18.0 13.0 3.0 100.0 Valid Percent 34.0 32.0 18.0 13.0 3.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 34.0 66.0 84.0 97.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 6

Working hours are convenient for me
40

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

W orking hours are convenient for me

Interpretation: From the above chart and table it is clearly evident that 34% of the respondents strongly agree that working hours are convenient from them and 32% agree with that and 18% neither agree nor disagree and 13% disagree with the working hours and 3% are strongly against working hours.

Table No: 7

I'm happy iwth my work place Frequency 30 39 18 8 5 100 Percent 30.0 39.0 18.0 8.0 5.0 100.0 Valid Percent 30.0 39.0 18.0 8.0 5.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 30.0 69.0 87.0 95.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 7
I'm happy iwth my work place
50

40

30

Frequency

20

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

I'm happy iwth m y work place

Interpretation: From the above table it is clear that 30% respondents strongly agree and 39% respondents agree that they are happy with their work place only 13% disagreed and 18% have no idea towards their work place.

Table No: 8

The lightings and othe r arrange ments with office are satisfactory Frequency 33 37 18 5 7 100 Percent 33.0 37.0 18.0 5.0 7.0 100.0 Valid Percent 33.0 37.0 18.0 5.0 7.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 33.0 70.0 88.0 93.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 8
40

The lightings and other arrangements with office are sa

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

The lightings and other arrangem ents with office are satisfactory

Interpretation: From the above table its is evident that 33% respondents strongly agree with the lightings and arrangements in the office, 37% agree with that and 12% disagree with the lightings and arrangements and 18% have no idea towards lightings and arrangements.

Table No: 9

I fe e l i hav e too much work to do Frequency 7 9 25 37 22 100 Percent 7.0 9.0 25.0 37.0 22.0 100.0 Valid Percent 7.0 9.0 25.0 37.0 22.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 7.0 16.0 41.0 78.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 9

I feel i have too much work to do
40

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

I feel i have too much work to do

Interpretation: From the above table it is quite clear that the work load is not high, 37% of the respondents disagreed with the question” I feel I have too much work” and another 22% strongly disagreed, 18% admits they have too much work and 23% have no idea towards this question.

Table No: 10 safe ty me asure s prov ide d by the company Frequency 28 31 24 11 6 100 Percent 28.0 31.0 24.0 11.0 6.0 100.0 Valid Percent 28.0 31.0 24.0 11.0 6.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 28.0 59.0 83.0 94.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 10

safety measures provided by the company
40

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

safety measures provided by the company

Interpretation: From the above table it is evident that the safety measures provided by the organizations are good as 28 and 31% of the respondents agree with that and only 11& 6% disagreed and 24% neither agreed nor disagreed.

TableNo: 11

M y re lationship with my supe rv isor is cordial Frequency 30 41 16 6 7 100 Percent 30.0 41.0 16.0 6.0 7.0 100.0 Valid Percent 30.0 41.0 16.0 6.0 7.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 30.0 71.0 87.0 93.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 11

My relationship with my supervisor is cordial
50

40

30

Frequency

20

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

My relationship with my supervisor is cordial

Interpretation: From the above table it is clear that relationship between employees and their supervisors are cordial because 30% of respondents strongly agreed to it and 41% agreed to it and only 13% disagreed and 16% of respondents have neither agreed nor disagreed.

Tale No: 12

M y superv isor is not partial Frequency 18 30 15 19 18 100 Percent 18.0 30.0 15.0 19.0 18.0 100.0 Valid Percent 18.0 30.0 15.0 19.0 18.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 18.0 48.0 63.0 82.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 12

My supervisor is not partial
40

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

My supervisor is not partial

Interpretation: From the above table it is evident that the supervisors are not partial to the employees as 18% strongly agreed and 30% agreed to the question but 19% disagreed and 18% strongly disagreed this level is quite high compared to other questions.

Table No: 13

M y supe rv isor conside rs my ide a too while taking de cision Frequency 26 43 26 2 3 100 Percent 26.0 43.0 26.0 2.0 3.0 100.0 Valid Percent 26.0 43.0 26.0 2.0 3.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 26.0 69.0 95.0 97.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 13

My supervisor considers my idea too while taking decisio
50

40

30

Frequency

20

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

My supervisor considers my idea too while taking decision

Interpretation: From the above table it is clear that 26 and 42% of the respondents agree that supervisors consider their employees ideas also and only 5% disagreed and 26% neither agreed nor disagreed.

Table No: 14

I'm satisfie d with the support from my co-worke rs Frequency 21 47 16 9 7 100 Percent 21.0 47.0 16.0 9.0 7.0 100.0 Valid Percent 21.0 47.0 16.0 9.0 7.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 21.0 68.0 84.0 93.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 14

I'm satisfied with the support from my co-workers
50

40

30

Frequency

20

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

I'm satisfied with the support from my co-workers

Interpretation: From the above table it is clear that relation with co-workers is quite good as nearly 68% of the respondents agree that they are satisfied with support from co-workers and only 15% disagreed and 16% have no answer to this

Table No: 15

Pe ople here have concern from one anothe r and tend to he lp one another Frequency 26 41 19 9 5 100 Percent 26.0 41.0 19.0 9.0 5.0 100.0 Valid Percent 26.0 41.0 19.0 9.0 5.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 26.0 67.0 86.0 95.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 15
50

People here have concern from one another and tend to

40

30

Frequency

20

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

People here have concern from one another and tend to help one another

Interpretation: From the above table it is clear that in this organization people have concern over each other as 26% strongly agreed and 41% agreed and only 14% disagreed and 19% neither agreed nor disagreed.

Table No: 16

I'm satisfie d with the re fre shme nt facilitie s Frequency 9 20 30 26 15 100 Percent 9.0 20.0 30.0 26.0 15.0 100.0 Valid Percent 9.0 20.0 30.0 26.0 15.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 9.0 29.0 59.0 85.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 16

I'm satisfied with the refreshment facilities
40

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

I'm satisfied with the refreshment facilities

Interpretation: From the above table it is clear that the employees are not satisfied with the refreshment facilities offered by the company as 26% of respondents disagreed and 15% strongly disagreed and 30% neither agreed nor disagreed and only 29% agreed.

Table No: 17

We are prov ide d with the re st and lunch room and the y are good Frequency 8 16 22 34 20 100 Percent 8.0 16.0 22.0 34.0 20.0 100.0 Valid Percent 8.0 16.0 22.0 34.0 20.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 8.0 24.0 46.0 80.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 17

We are provided with the rest and lunch room and they ar
40

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

W e are provided with the rest and lunch room and they are good

Interpretation: From the above table it is quite evident that 24% strongly disagreed and 30% of the respondents disagreed and 22% neither agreed nor disagreed and only 24% of the respondents are satisfied with the rest and lunch room provided.

Table No: 18

The parking space for our v e hicle s are satisfactory Frequency 4 9 24 32 31 100 Percent 4.0 9.0 24.0 32.0 31.0 100.0 Valid Percent 4.0 9.0 24.0 32.0 31.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 4.0 13.0 37.0 69.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 18

The parking space for our vehicles are satisfactory
40

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

The parking space for our vehicles are satisfactory

Interpretation: From the above table it is clear that respondents are not satisfied with the parking facilities provided by the company as 31% of respondents strongly disagreed and 32% of respondents disagreed and only 13% of respondents are satisfied with the parking facilities and 24% have neither agreed nor disagreed.

Table No: 19

I'm satisfie d with the first aid facilitie s Frequency 5 12 31 31 21 100 Percent 5.0 12.0 31.0 31.0 21.0 100.0 Valid Percent 5.0 12.0 31.0 31.0 21.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 5.0 17.0 48.0 79.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 19

I'm satisfied with the first aid facilities
40

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

I'm satisfied with the first aid facilities

Interpretation: From the above table it is clear that employees are not satisfied with the first aid facilities as more than 52% ( 31% disagree and 21% strongly disagree) disagreed and only 17% agreed and 31% of respondents neither agreed nor disagreed.

Table No: 20

I'm satisfie d with the loan facilitie s and othe r pe rsonal we lfare faclitie s offe re d by the company Frequency 7 12 30 34 17 100 Percent 7.0 12.0 30.0 34.0 17.0 100.0 Valid Percent 7.0 12.0 30.0 34.0 17.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 7.0 19.0 49.0 83.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 20

I'm satisfied with the loan facilities and other personal
40

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

I'm satisfied with the loan facilities and other personal welfare faclit

Interpretation: From the above table it is quite clear that respondents are not satisfied with the loan facilities offered by the organization as 34% of respondents disagree and 17% of respondents strongly disagree 30% of respondents neither agree nor disagree and only 19% are satisfied with the loan facilities.

Table No: 21

I fe ll I'm paid a fair amount for the work i do Frequency 15 39 25 13 8 100 Percent 15.0 39.0 25.0 13.0 8.0 100.0 Valid Percent 15.0 39.0 25.0 13.0 8.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 15.0 54.0 79.0 92.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 21

I fell I'm paid a fair amount for the work i do
50

40

30

Frequency

20

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

I fell I'm paid a fair amount for the work i do

Interpretation: From the above table it is evident that the respondents are satisfied with their salary as 39% agree and 15% strongly agree. Only `3% disagree and 8% strongly disagree, 25% neither agree nor disagree.

Table No: 22

I'm satisfie d with the chance s for my promotion Frequency 27 43 13 9 8 100 Percent 27.0 43.0 13.0 9.0 8.0 100.0 Valid Percent 27.0 43.0 13.0 9.0 8.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 27.0 70.0 83.0 92.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 22

I'm satisfied with the chances for my promotion
50

40

30

Frequency

20

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

I'm satisfied with the chances for my promotion

Interpretation: From the above table it is quite clear that employees are satisfied with their chances for promotion as 43% agree and 27% strongly agree. Only 9% disagree and 8% strongly disagree, 13% neither agree nor disagree.

Table No: 23
The salary we re ce iv e are good as othe r organizations offe r pay to the ir e mploye e s Frequency 27 37 26 6 4 100 Percent 27.0 37.0 26.0 6.0 4.0 100.0 Valid Percent 27.0 37.0 26.0 6.0 4.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 27.0 64.0 90.0 96.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 23
40

The salary we receive are good as other organizations o

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

The salary we receive are good as other organizations offer pay to their

Interpretation: From the above table it is quite clear that the salary in this organization is at par to the industry as 37% agree and 27% strongly agree. Only 6% disagree and 4% strongly disagree, 26% neither agree nor disagree.

Table No: 24
I'm satisfie d with the allown ace s prov ide d by the organization Frequency 19 42 21 11 7 100 Percent 19.0 42.0 21.0 11.0 7.0 100.0 Valid Percent 19.0 42.0 21.0 11.0 7.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 19.0 61.0 82.0 93.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 24

I'm satisfied with the allownaces provided by the organizat
50

40

30

Frequency

20

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

I'm satisfied with the allownaces provided by the organization

Interpretation: From the above table it is clear that the employees are satisfied with the allowances and other benefits provided by the organization as 42% agree and 19% strongly agree. Only 11% disagree and 7% strongly disagree, 21% neither agree nor disagree.

Table No: 25

I fe el my boss motiv ate me to achiev e the organizational goals Frequency 11 33 25 22 9 100 Percent 11.0 33.0 25.0 22.0 9.0 100.0 Valid Percent 11.0 33.0 25.0 22.0 9.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 11.0 44.0 69.0 91.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 25
40

I feel my boss motivate me to achieve the organizational go

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

I feel my boss motivate me to achieve the organizational goals

Interpretation: From the above table it is evident that employees boss are motivating to achieve organizational goals as 33% agree and 11% strongly agree. 22% disagree this is quite high compared to other factors and 9% strongly disagree and 25% neither agree nor disagree.

Table No: 26

M y supe rv isor motiv ate s me to incre ase my e fficie ncy at time s whe n i'm not productiv e Frequency 18 44 18 13 7 100 Percent 18.0 44.0 18.0 13.0 7.0 100.0 Valid Percent 18.0 44.0 18.0 13.0 7.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 18.0 62.0 80.0 93.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 26

My supervisor motivates me to increase my efficiency a
50

40

30

Frequency

20

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

My supervisor motivates me to increase my efficiency at times when i'm n

Interpretation: From the above table it is evident that employees boss motivates the employee when he is unproductive and help him to be productive as 44% agree and 18% strongly agree. Only 7% strongly disagree and 7% disagree, 18% neither agree nor disagree.

Table Nio: 27
Communication se e ms good within this organization Frequency 26 39 17 10 8 100 Percent 26.0 39.0 17.0 10.0 8.0 100.0 Valid Percent 26.0 39.0 17.0 10.0 8.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 26.0 65.0 82.0 92.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 27

Communication seems good within this organization
50

40

30

Frequency

20

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

Communication seems good within this organization

Interpretation: From the above table it is clear that communication seems good in this organization as 39% agree and 26% strongly agree. Only 10% disagree and 8% strongly disagree. 17% neither agree nor disagree.

Table No: 28

Work assignme nts are e xplaine d cle arly to me Frequency 17 41 15 17 10 100 Percent 17.0 41.0 15.0 17.0 10.0 100.0 Valid Percent 17.0 41.0 15.0 17.0 10.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 17.0 58.0 73.0 90.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 28

W ork assignments are explained clearly to me
50

40

30

Frequency

20

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

W ork assignments are explained clearly to me

Interpretation: From the above table it is evident that respondents are quite happy with the way work assignments are explained as 41% agree and 17% strongly agree. Only 10% strongly disagree and 17% agree, 15% neither agree nor disagree.

Table No: 29

I lov e my job and to work in this organization Frequency 19 38 20 14 9 100 Percent 19.0 38.0 20.0 14.0 9.0 100.0 Valid Percent 19.0 38.0 20.0 14.0 9.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 19.0 57.0 77.0 91.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 29

I love my job and to work in this organization
40

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

I love my job and to work in this organization

Interpretation: From the above table it is clear that employees love their job as 38% agree for this question and 19% strongly agree. Only 9% strongly disagree and 14% disagree, 20% neither agree nor disagree.

Table No: 30

M y work life is me aningful Frequency 25 40 16 7 12 100 Percent 25.0 40.0 16.0 7.0 12.0 100.0 Valid Percent 25.0 40.0 16.0 7.0 12.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 25.0 65.0 81.0 88.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 30

My work life is meaningful
50

40

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

My work life is meaningful

Interpretation: From the above table it is clear that respondents feel that their job is meaningful for them as 40% agree and 25% strongly agree. Only 7% disagree and 12% strongly disagree, 16% neither agree nor disagree.
Table No: 31

I conside r that my work is valuable in attaining my organizational goals Frequency 25 47 12 7 9 100 Percent 25.0 47.0 12.0 7.0 9.0 100.0 Valid Percent 25.0 47.0 12.0 7.0 9.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 25.0 72.0 84.0 91.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 31

I consider that my work is valuable in attaining my organiz
50

40

30

Frequency

20

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

I consider that my work is valuable in attaining my organizational goals

Interpretation: From the above table it is quite clear that most respondents feel that their job is contributing for organizational goals as 47% agree and 25% strongly disagree. Only 9% strongly disagree and 7% disagree, 12% neither agree nor disagree.

Table No: 32
I hav e ade quate opportunity to use my ability Frequency 12 30 24 21 13 100 Percent 12.0 30.0 24.0 21.0 13.0 100.0 Valid Percent 12.0 30.0 24.0 21.0 13.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 12.0 42.0 66.0 87.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 32

I have adequate opportunity to use my ability
40

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

I have adequate opportunity to use m y ability

Interpretation: From the above table it is quite clear that respondents have adequate opportunity to use their ability as 30% agree and 12% disagree. Only 13% strongly disagree and 21% disagree and 24% neither agree nor disagree.

Table No: 33
Ov e rall I'm satisfie d with my job Frequency 21 33 25 15 6 100 Percent 21.0 33.0 25.0 15.0 6.0 100.0 Valid Percent 21.0 33.0 25.0 15.0 6.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 21.0 54.0 79.0 94.0 100.0

Valid

strongly agree agree neither agree nor disagree disagree strongly disagree Total

Chart No: 33

Overall I'm satisfied with my job
40

30

20

Frequency

10

0 strongly agree agree neither agree nor di disagree strongly disagree

Overall I'm satisfied with m y job

Interpretation: From the above table it is evident that Overall satisfactions of the respondents are good as 33% agree and 21% strongly agree. Only 6% strongly disagree and 15% disagree and 25% neither agree nor disagree.

ONE WAY ANOVA H0: There is no significant difference among respondents of various experience groups with regard to Environment and nature of work factor. H1: There is significant difference among respondents of various experience groups with regard to Environment and nature of work factor Table No: 34 ANOVA Environment and Nature of work Sum of Squares .591 30.168 30.758 F .465

df

Between Groups Within Groups Total Interpretation:

4 95 99

Mean Square .148 .318

Sig. .761

Since the significant difference is greater than 0.05 accept null hypothesis and reject alternate hypothesis which says, there is no significant difference among respondents of various experience with respect to environment and nature of work. H0: There is no significant difference among respondents of various experience groups with regard to the factor Relationship with supervisors and colleagues. H1:

There is significant difference among respondents of various experience groups with regard to the factor Relationship with supervisors and colleagues. Table No: 35 ANOVA Relationship with supervisors and colleagues Sum of Squares 1.199 22.376 23.576 df Mean Square .300 .236 F 1.273 Sig. .286

Between Groups Within Groups Total Interpretation:

4 95 99

Since the significant difference is greater than 0.05 accept null hypothesis and reject alternate hypothesis which says, there is no significant difference among respondents of various experience with respect to Relationship with supervisors and colleagues. H0: There is no significant difference among respondents of various experience groups with regard to the factor Welfare facilities

H1: There is significant difference among respondents of various experience groups with regard to the factor Welfare facilities Table No: 36

ANOVA Welfare facilities Sum of Squares 1.741 28.699 30.440 df Mean Square .435 .302 F 1.441 Sig. .227

Between Groups Within Groups Total

4 95 99

Interpretation: Since the significant difference is greater than 0.05 accept null hypothesis and reject alternate hypothesis which says, there is no significant difference among respondents of various experience with respect to welfare facilities. H0: There is no significant difference among respondents of various experience groups with regard to the factor Pay and Promotion H1: There is significant difference among respondents of various experience groups with regard to the factor Pay and Promotion

Table No: 37

ANOVA Pay and Promotion Sum of Squares 3.148 35.017 38.165 df 4 95 99 Mean Square .787 .369 F 2.135 Sig. .082

Between Groups Within Groups Total

Interpretation: Since the significant difference is greater than 0.05 accept null hypothesis and reject alternate hypothesis which says, there is no significant difference among respondents of various experience with respect to Pay and promotion. H0: There is no significant difference among respondents of various experience groups with regard to the factor Communication and Motivation. H1: There is significant difference among respondents of various experience groups with regard to the factor Communication and Motivation.

Table No: 38

ANOVA Communication and Motivation Sum of Squares .937 34.100 35.037 df 4 95 99 Mean Square .234 .359 F .652 Sig. .627

Between Groups Within Groups Total

Interpretation: Since the significant difference is greater than 0.05 accept null hypothesis and reject alternate hypothesis which says, there is no significant difference among respondents of various experience with respect to communication and motivation. H0: There is no significant difference among respondents of various experience groups with regard to Job Factors. H1: There is significant difference among respondents of various experience groups with regard to Job Factors Table No: 39

ANOVA job factor Sum of Squares 1.437 39.360 40.798 df 4 95 99 Mean Square .359 .414 F .867 Sig. .487

Between Groups Within Groups Total

Interpretation:

Since the significant difference is greater than 0.05 accept null hypothesis and reject alternate hypothesis which says, there is no significant difference among respondents of various experience with respect to Job factors H0: There is no significant difference among respondents of various Age groups with regard to Job Factors. H1: There is significant difference among respondents of various Age groups with regard to Job Factors. Table No: 40
ANOVA job factor Sum of Squares .007 40.790 40.798 df 2 97 99 Mean Square .004 .421 F .009 Sig. .991

Between Groups Within Groups Total

Interpretation: Since the significant difference is greater than 0.05 accept null hypothesis and reject alternate hypothesis which says, there is no significant difference among respondents of various age groups with respect to Job factors.

H0:

There is no significant difference among respondents of various genders with regard to Job Factors. H1: There is significant difference among respondents of various genders with regard to Job Factors. Table No: 41

ANOVA job factor Sum of Squares .036 40.762 40.798 df 1 98 99 Mean Square .036 .416 F .086 Sig. .770

Between Groups Within Groups Total

Interpretation: Since the significant difference is greater than 0.05 accept null hypothesis and reject alternate hypothesis which says, there is no significant difference among respondents of various genders with respect to Job factors.

Chapter -V

De scriptiv e Statistics N environment and nature of work ationship with supervisors and colleagues welfare facilities pay and promotion communiction and motivation job factors Valid N (listwise) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Minimum 1.40 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.25 1.20 Maximum 4.20 3.80 4.60 4.00 4.00 4.40 Mean 2.4960 2.3620 3.4600 2.3900 2.5725 2.5400 Std. Deviation .55740 .48799 .55450 .62089 .59490 .56174

5.1 Findings: The descriptive statistics table helps us to derive satisfaction level of employees on various factors: The respondents are satisfied with the environment and nature of work factors as their mean value is near to 2.50 The respondent’s relationship with the superiors and colleagues are quite good as their mean value is 2.36 is an agreeable level. The Respondents are not provided with proper welfare facilities that’s the reason the mean value is quite high at 3.46 levels which is disagree level. The communication and motivation of employees by their superiors in this organization is reasonable as the mean value is 2.57. The Pay and promotion activities in this organization is also good as their mean value is 2.4

The Respondents are overall satisfied with their job as their mean value is 2.54 which is an agreeable level. The Parking facilities provided by the organization are not good that’s why most respondents disagree with this question. The refreshment facilities are also need to be improved because most of the employees are dissatisfied on this factor. The Rest room facilities in the company are not good and they are not satisfied with the lunch facilities. Suggestions:

Questionnaire “A study on Job Satisfaction of Employees in Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Ltd” 1. Name: ………………………………………………………………………………… … 2. Age: ……………… 3. Gender: Male Female

4. Monthly Income: A) Below Rest. 10,000 B) 10,000- 20000 C) 20,000-30000 D) Above 30,000 5. Education Qualification: A) Under graduation B) Post – graduation 6. Marital Status A) Married B) Unmarried 7. Years of experience: A) Less than 1yr B) 1-2 yrs C) 2-3 yrs D) 3-4 yrs E) Above 4yrs Please indicate your level of agreement in connection with various factors: 1. Strongly agree 2. Agree 3. Neither agree nor disagree 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree Work Environment and nature of work S. Particulars 1 2 3 4 5 No 1. Working hours are convenient for me 2. I’m happy with my work place 3. The lighting and other arrangements in the office are satisfactory 4. I feel I have too much work to do 5. I’m satisfied with the safety measures provided by my company Relationship with supervisors and colleagues S. Particulars No 1 2 3 4 5

6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

My relationship with my supervisor is cordial My supervisor is not partial My supervisor considers my ideas too while making decision I’m satisfied with the support from my coworkers People here have concern for one another and tend to help one another

Welfare Facilities S. No 11 12 13 14 15 Particulars I’m satisfied with the refreshment facilities We are provided with the rest and lunch room and they are good The parking facilities provided for our vehicles are satisfactory I’m satisfied with the first aid facilities I’m satisfied with the Loan facilities and other personal welfare benefits offered by company 1 2 3 4 5

Pay and promotion S. No 16 17 18 19 Particulars I feel I’m being paid a fair amount for the work I do I’m satisfied with my chances for promotion The salaries we receive are good as other organizations pay to their employees. I’m satisfied with the allowances provided by my organization 1 2 3 4 5

Communication and motivation S. No 20 Particulars I feel that my Boss motivate me to achieve the organization goal 1 2 3 4 5

21 22 23

My supervisor motivates me to increase my efficiency at times when I’m not productive Communication seem good within this organization Work assignments are explained clearly to me

Job factors S. No 24 25 26 27 28 Particulars I love my job and to work in this organization My work life is meaningful I consider that my work is valuable in attaining my organizational goals I have adequate opportunity to use my ability Overall, I’m satisfied with my job 1 2 3 4 5

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.