CHI-CSQUARE ANALYSIS-1

Step1:

Null hypothesis (Ho):

There is no significance difference between the salary of the respondents and proper HR
planning in the company.

alternative hypothesis (H1):

There is some significance difference between the salary of the respondents and proper HR
planning in the company

Step 2:

Level of significance at 5%

Observed frequency

Educational Proper HR planning in the company

qualification
Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly
Total
agree disagree

Rs.5,001 – 5 18 6 2 2 33
Rs.10,000
Rs.10,001 –
8 11 13 3 0 35
Rs.15,000
Rs.15,001 –
3 7 3 4 1 18
Rs.20,000
Rs.20,001 –
0 3. 3 2 0 18
Rs.25,000
Above
0 1 2 3 0 6
Rs.25,000
Total 16 40 27 15 3 100

Step 4:

Expected frequency
 Row total x Columntotal
¿
Grand total

5.28 13.20 8.91 4.95 0.99

5.60 14.00 9.45 5.25 1.05
2.88 7.20 4.86 2.70 0.54
2.88 7.20 4.86 2.70 0.54
0.96 2.40 1.62 0.90 0.18
17.60 44.00 29.70 16.50 3.30

Step 5:

O E (O-E) (O-E)2 (O-E)2/E

5 5.28 -0.28 0.08 0.01
18 13.20 4.80 23.04 1.75
6 8.91 -2.91 8.47 0.95
2 4.95 -2.95 8.70 1.76
2 0.99 1.01 1.02 1.03
8 5.60 2.40 5.76 1.03
11 14.00 -3.00 9.00 0.64
13 9.45 3.55 12.60 1.33
3 5.25 -2.25 5.06 0.96
0 1.05 -1.05 1.10 1.05
3 2.88 0.12 0.01 0.01
7 7.20 -0.20 0.04 0.01
3 4.86 -1.86 3.46 0.71
4 2.70 1.30 1.69 0.63
1 0.54 0.46 0.21 0.39
0 2.88 -2.88 8.29 2.88
3 7.20 -4.20 17.64 2.45
3 4.86 -1.86 3.46 0.71
2 2.70 -0.70 0.49 0.18
0 0.54 -0.54 0.29 0.54
 0 0.96 -0.96 0.92 0.96
1 2.40 -1.40 1.96 0.82
2 1.62 0.38 0.14 0.09
3 0.90 2.10 4.41 4.90
0 0.18 -0.18 0.03 0.18
100 111.10     25.97

Step 6:

Table value

Degrees of freedom =x (r-1) (c-1)

= (5-1) (5-1)

= 16

Calculate Value = 31.70855

Table Value = 15.338

Step 7:

Comparision

As tabulated value (15.338) is less than calculated value (31.708), NHO is rejected

and NH1 is accepted.

RESULT:

It is clear from the above table that NH O is rejected and there is significant difference
between salary of the respondents and proper HR planning in the company.

CHI-CSQUARE ANALYSIS-II
Step1:

Null hypothesis (Ho):

There is no significance difference between the gender of the respondents and effectively
utilize the human resources.

alternative hypothesis (H1):

There is some significance difference between the gender of the respondents and effectively
utilize the human resources.

Step 2:

Level of significance at 5%

Step 3:

Observed frequency

Gender of the Effectively utilizing the human resources

respondents
Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly
Total
agree disagree

Male 21 22 11 2 1 57

Female 7 12 15 4 5 43

Total 28 34 26 6 6 100

Step 4:

Expected frequency

Row total x Columntotal

¿
Grand total

15.96 19.38 14.82 3.42 3.42 57

12.04 14.62 11.18 2.58 2.58 43
28 34 26 6 6 100
 Tota
l

Step 5:

O E (O-E) (O-E)2 (O-E)2/2

21 15.96 5.04 25.4016 1.592

22 19.38 2.62 6.8644 0.354

11 14.82 -3.82 14.5924 0.985

2 3.42 -1.42 2.0164 0.590

1 3.42 -2.42 5.8564 1.712

7 12.04 -5.04 25.4016 2.110

12 14.62 -2.62 6.8644 0.470

15 11.18 3.82 14.5924 1.305

4 2.58 1.42 2.0164 0.782

5 2.58 2.42 5.8564 2.270

100 100 - - 12.170

Step 6:

Table value

Degrees of freedom =x (r-1) (c-1)

= (2-1) (5-1)

=4

Chi square value for 4= 9.488

Step 7:

Comparision
 As calculated value (12.170) is less than tabulated value (9.488), NH O is accepted

and NH1 is rejected.

RESULT:

It is clear from the above table that NH O is accepted and there is no significant
difference between the gender of the respondents and effectively utilize the human resources.