Professional Documents
Culture Documents
net/publication/228121862
CITATIONS READS
7 1,417
2 authors:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Effects of Personality and risk tolerance on financial decision making of equity investors View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Anju Verma on 17 March 2016.
1
Dr. M. C. Garg
2
Ms. Anju Verma
Abstract
The Government of India created history on October 24, 2000 once again by bringing back
insurance business to private companies which had been abolished thirty four years back.
The opening of the sector has been facilitated through IRDA. Today, organizations are
competing in complex business environment characterized by continuous change in
economic, social, politico-legal and regulatory factors. The insurance sector along with
other elements of the marketing as well as financial infrastructure has been touched and
influenced by the process of liberalization and globalization process in India. Today,
customer is the king of the market. The life insurance companies deals in intangible
product. With the entry of private players, now the competition is becoming intense. In
order to satisfy the customer well, every company is trying to implement marketing mix
programmed very well. Keeping this in mind, present study is designed to analyze the
marketing mix in Life Insurance in India. The population for the research comprises all the
employees of public life insurance company as well as private life insurance companies in
India. Samples of 95 employees are drawn on the bases of convenient sampling. The data is
collected using a well structured (3 point scale) questionnaire. The responses regarding the
9 dimensions of marketing mix are measured with the help of descriptive as well as
statistical analysis. Nine dimensions are converting into four factors after applying Factor
Analysis through Principal Component Analysis. Efforts are made to represent people from
different age group, gender, qualification, hierarchy and type of the organization. The
present research paper is divided into four sections. Section I introduces about the topic,
Section II represents review of literature and research methodology, Section III indicates
descriptive and statistical inferences, and Section IV highlights the concluding remarks.
1
Dr. M. C. Garg, Reader, Haryana School of Business, Guru Jambheshwar University of Science &
Technology, Hisar, 125 001, E-mail: mc_garg@yahoo.com.
2
Ms. Anju Verma, Lecturer, Haryana School of Business, Guru Jambheshwar University of Science &
Technology, Hisar, 125 001, E-mail: anju_gju@yahoo.com.
An Empirical Analysis of Marketing Mix in Life Insurance
Industry in India
I. Introduction
Indian insurance market is likely to spectator the deep changes in the sphere of all
the four programmes of marketing mix. The customer driven market would result a
lot of flexibilities and innovations in products, pricing, distribution channels and
communication mechanisms. The Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority
(IRDA) with its developmental and regulatory guidelines are likely to endorse
competition, fairness and reliability and at the same time protect insured against
excessive, inadequate or unfairly discriminatory rates while efforts for
intensification of the existing distribution channels and making them more effective
will continue. Introduction of new intermediaries like insurance brokers, new
boulevard like bancassurance and utilization of electronics media and internet
would call for new strategies. Communication to create more awareness and
greater demand for insurance products will continue to assume high importance. At
the same time, unfair or misleading advertisements will be discouraged and
necessary checks and controls will be in place. The Present research paper focuses
on such problems of marketing mix in life insurance industry in India is divided into
four sections. Section I introduces about the topic, Section II represents review of
literature and research methodology, Section III indicates descriptive and
statistical inferences, and Section IV highlights the concluding remarks.
Gupta, (1996) examined that the insurance sector reforms are a part of the
Government’s priorities. A package of reforms is very much in the offing. There is
an immediate need of a regulatory framework to open up the insurance industry.
Mittal, (1998) analytically examined the global market to observe how the new
sense of competition which will come to the market after the liberalization will
affect the non-life insurance markets structure and operation in India. Jha, (1999)
commented that improvement in life span and advancement in medical science had
changed the customers’ needs for insurance products worldwide. The focus of the
insurers in matured market of the west had shifted to pension, health care and
protection products. Hasanbanu, and Nagajyothi, (2007) concluded that there is
significant relationship between age, educational qualification, gender, occupation
and income of respondents and their level of investment with taking LIC policies
and further concluded that there is no significant relation between marital-status,
family type and family size and their level of investment with taking LIC policies.
The prime objective of this research paper is:
To study the nature, pattern and process of marketing mix in the insurance
companies in India.
To achieve the aforesaid objective the following hypothesis are set:
1. There is no significant difference between the respondents of various age
groups regarding the variables of marketing mix.
2. There is no significant difference between male and female respondents
concerning the variables of marketing mix.
3. There is no significant difference between the respondents of various
qualifications about the variables of marketing mix.
4. There is no significant difference between the respondents of various
hierarchies as regards to the variables of marketing mix.
5. There is no significant difference between the public company and private
companies respondents regarding the variables of marketing mix.
MM 7 It represents that the life insurance companies adjusts its marketing mix in relation to
specific segments.
MM 8 It denotes that the other departments understand the mix concept and they are invited to take
parting its development.
MM 9 It expresses that the life insurance company do briefing about mix
plan to outside contractors (such as research/advertising agencies).
MM5 A high portions (48 respondents) opinioned that careful analysis is carried
out regularly in order to identify the most effective and most economical mix.
Almost equal (47) respondents viewed that careful analysis is carried out
sometimes in order to identify the most effective and most economical mix. Out of
48 respondents, 26 belong to 30-40 years age group while 43 are male
respondents. Qualification wise analysis depicted that big part (22) is graduate
respondents. Maximum part (22) is on senior position and 29 belongs to public
company who opinioned that careful analysis is carried out regularly in order to
identify the most effective and most economical mix.
MM6 41 respondents expressed their views that life insurance firms regularly
consider the understanding of competitor’s mix very carefully whereas 42
respondents are of opinion that companies do analyze its competitors’ mix
sometimes, and only 12 respondents observes that company rarely attempt to
analyze its competitor’s mix. Out of 41 respondents, 21 belong to 30-40 years age
group while 33 are male respondents. Qualification wise analysis depicted that big
part (18) is post graduate respondents. Maximum part (18) is on senior position
and 22 belongs to public company who opinioned that life insurance firms regularly
consider the understanding of competitor’s mix very carefully.
MM7 Most of (35 respondents) respondents are of opinion that life insurance
companies rarely adjust its marketing mix in relation to specific segment followed
by 30 respondents who are of opinion that life insurance companies adjust
sometimes the components of mix whereas the same proportion (30 respondents)
are opinioned that the mix is adjusted regularly. Out of 35 respondents, 17 belong
to 30-40 years age group while 27 are male respondents. Qualification wise
analysis depicted that big part (17) is graduate respondents. Maximum part (17) is
on senior position and 21 belong to public company who opinioned that life
insurance companies rarely adjust its marketing mix in relation to specific
segment.
MM9 49 respondents viewed that companies sometime provides provide full details
of their marketing mix plans to outside contractors while 29 respondents viewed
that companies regularly provides full details about mix plans. Only 17 respondents
deny that company rarely provides any idea to outside contractors. Out of 49
respondents, 22 belong to 20-30 years age group while 43 are male respondents.
Qualification wise analysis depicted that big part (21) is graduate respondents.
Maximum part (23) is on middle position and 25 belongs to private company who
opinioned that companies sometime provides provide full details of their marketing
mix plans to outside contractors.
Variables MM1 MM2 MM3 MM4 MM5 MM6 MM7 MM8 MM9
After calculating high relationship between the variables of marketing mix, Factor
Analysis is carried out to investigate the linear relationship of some underlying
factors. Requesting principal components analysis and specifying in a rotation the
output of Factor Analysis is obtain. Table 3 provides output of the Factor Analysis
for this problem, the rotated factor matrix comprising all nine variables, the per
cent of variance, cumulative per cent of variance and the Eigen values of all factors
having Eigen values of 1 or more than 1. It is seen from the cumulative per cent of
variance column that three factors extracted together account for 76.0783 per cent
of total variance (information contained in the original 9 variables). This is a pretty
good bargain, because from the 9 variables 3 underlying factors are extracted in an
economised fashion. Total 76 per cent of information is retained by the three
factors extracted; only 24 per cent of information is lost out of 9 original variables.
Table 3 for rotated factor matrix, it is noticed that variable numbers MM1, MM2,
MM3, MM5, MM6 have loading of 0.595241, 0.761522, 0.770685, 0.723689 and
0.806814 on Factor 1. This suggests that Factor 1 is a combination of these five
original variables. Keeping in view the nature of the variables, Factor 1 is naming
as Mix Ingredient. Further, it is noticed that variable number MM4, MM8 and MM9
have loading of 0.880292, 0.895827 and 0.872779 on Factor 2. This suggests that
Factor 2 is a combination of these three original variables. Keeping in view the
nature of these variables, Factor 2 is naming as Mix Development. Further, it is
noticed that variable MM7 have loading of 0.960976 on Factor 3. This suggests that
Factor 3 is comprises single variable. Keeping in view the nature of this variable,
Factor 3 is naming as Mix Adjustment. Table depicted that Mix Ingredient is found
most important factor followed by Mix Development and Mix Adjustment.
After reducing original data by applying factor analysis, statistical tools One-way
ANOVA (on age, qualification and hierarchy) and t-test (on sex and organization) is
applied to draw concrete results. These tests are applied on three factors namely,
Mix Ingredient, Mix Development and Mix Adjustment (Factor1, Factor2, and
Factor3) those come out because of factor analysis.
Table 4 depicted that the mean values for Factor 1 (Mix Ingredient) are 2.032,
2.454 and 2.460 with values of S.D. 0.527, 0.463 and 0.528 respectively for the
respondents of age groups of 20-30, 30-40 years, and 40 years and above. The
value of F is 7.114 at 0.001 significant level. To conclude, it can be said that there
is significant difference (the value of significant level for F-test is less than 0.05)
between the opinions of respondents of various age groups regarding Mix
Ingredients. The mean values for Factor 2 (Mix Development) are 2.297, 2.415 and
2.400 with S.D. 0.619, 0.665 and 0.629 respectively for different age groups. The
value of F is 0.358 at 0.700 significant level.
To sum up, it can be extracted that there is no significant difference (the value of
significant level for F-test is greater than 0.05) between the opinions of
respondents of various age groups regarding Mix Development. The mean values
for Factor 3 (Mix Adjustment) are 1.842, 1.919 and 2.200 with values of S.D.
0.679, 0.924 and 0.894 respectively for the respondents of various age groups.
The F value is 1.261 at 0.288 significant level. To fathom out, it can be extracted
that there is no significant difference (the value of significant level for F-test is
greater than 0.05) between the opinions of respondents of various age groups
regarding Mix Adjustment.
Table 5 reveals that the mean value for male and female respondents for Mix
Ingredients is 2.285 and 2.293 with the value of S.D. 0.552 and 0.489
respectively. The value of t-test is -0.055 at 0.957 significant level. In simple
words, it is concluded that mean difference between the male and female
respondents regarding Factor 1 is not significant (the value of significant level for t-
test is greater than 0.05). The mean value for Mix Development is 2.383 and 2.267
with S.D. 0.611 and 0.769 respectively for both male and female respondents. The
t-value is 0.648 at 0.518 significant level. To sum up, it can be extracted that there
is no significant difference (the value of significant level for t-test is greater than
0.05) between the opinions of male and female respondents regarding Mix
Development.
Lastly, the value of mean for male and female respondents regarding Mix
Adjustment is 2.025, 1.533 with S.D 0.842 and 0.640 respectively. The t-value is
2.146 at 0.035 significant level. Surprisingly, here both male and female
respondents have significantly different (the value of significant level for t-test is
less than 0.05) opinion regarding Mix Adjustment.
Above analysis observes that hypothesis is also not fully accepted because male
and female respondents have significantly different opinion about Mix Adjustment.
One-way ANOVA for Qualification-wise Analysis
The mean values for junior, middle and senior level respondents regarding Mix
Ingredient are 2.264, 2.206 and 2.364 with the S.D. 0.423, 0.642 and 0.521
respectively. The F Value is 0.761 at 0.470 level of significant. In general sense, it
can be extracted that there is no significant difference (the value of significant level
for F-test is greater than 0.05) between the opinions of respondents of various
hierarchies.
The mean value for Mix Development is 2.400, 2.247 and 2.436 with S. D. 0.682,
0.566 and 0.659 respectively, for junior, middle and senior level respondents. The
F-Value is 0.812 at 0.447 significant level. In general sense, it can be extracted
that there is no significant difference (the value of significant level for F-test is
greater than 0.05) between the opinions of respondents of various hierarchies
regarding Mix Development.
Lastly, the mean value for Mix Adjustment is 1.920, 2.129 and 1.821 with S. D.
0.954, 0.718 and 0.823 respectively, for junior, middle and senior level
respondents. The F Value is 1.218 at 0.301 significant level. To abstract, it can be
extracted that there is no significant difference (the value of significant level for F-
test is greater than 0.05) between the opinions of respondents of various
hierarchies regarding Mix Adjustment.
Above analysis justified that hypothesis is fully accepted that there is no significant
difference between the opinions of respondents at various hierarchies regarding
variables of marketing mix.
The mean values for Mix Ingredient for the public and private organizations are
2.284 and 2.289 with S.D. 0.517 and 0.580 respectively. The t Value is -0.046 at
0.963 significant level. The mean values regarding Mix Development is 2.374 and
2.350 with S.D. 0.691 and 0.548 respectively for respondents of public and private
companies. The value of t is 0.178 at 0.859 significant level.
Further, the mean values for Mix Adjustment is 2.035 and 1.816 with S.D. 0.886
and 0.730 respectively for respondents of public and private companies. The value
of t is 1.266 at 0.209 significant level. To abstract, it can be extracted that there is
no significant difference (the value of significant level for t-test is greater than
0.05) between the opinions of respondents of public and private companies
regarding Mix Ingredient, Mix Development and Mix Adjustment.
Organization-wise statistical analysis revealed that hypothesis is fully accepted that
there is no significant difference between the opinions of private and public
company respondents regarding variables of marketing mix.
IV Concluding Remarks
In this paper, various dimensions of marketing mix are measured. The analysis is
done by five demographic variables namely, age, sex, qualification, hierarchy and
organization. The main findings are as following:
Factor Analysis depicted that Mix Ingredient is found as most important factor
followed by Mix Development and Mix Adjustment. It can also be extracted that
there is no significant difference between the opinions of respondents of various
hierarchies regarding Mix Adjustment. It can be extracted that there is no
significant difference between the opinions of respondents of public and private
companies regarding Mix Ingredient, Mix Development and Mix Adjustment.
Further, age-wise, sex-wise and qualification-wise analysis reveals that the
difference is found significant between the opinions of respondents regarding Mix
Ingredient, Mix Development and Mix Adjustment respectively. Above analysis
observes that hypothesis is also not fully accepted because male and female
respondents have significantly different opinion about Mix Adjustment.
***