100

CHAPTER 4
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS

Table 4.1 Table showing age wise classification of the respondents

S. No. Age-Group No. of Respondents Percentage of Respondents
1 18-25 303 60.6
2 26-35 136 27.2
3 36-45 41 8.2
4 46-55 10 2
5 Above 55 10 2
Total 500 100.0
Source: Primary Data

Age Group of the

Respondents
8.2 22

27.2
60.6

18-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 Above 55

Figure 4.1 Figure showing age wise classification of the respondents

Reference: Table 4.1

Interpretation

The above Table 4.1 and Figure 4.1 shows that the age-wise
classification of the respondents and Figure 4.1 depicts 60.6 % of respondents
belong to 18-25 years of age category, 27.2 % belong to 26-35 and the
remaining 13% comprises of the other age groups. It is found from the
analysis that nearly 87% of population falls between 18 and 35.
 101

Table 4.2 Table showing marital status of the respondents

S. No. Marital No. of Percentage of

Status Respondents Respondents
1 Married 179 35.8
2 Unmarried 321 64.2
Total 500 100.0
Source: Primary Data

Marital Status

35.8
Married
Un Married
64.2

Figure 4.2 Figure showing marital status of the respondents

Reference: Table 4.2

Interpretation

It is understood from the above Table 4.2 and from Figure 4.2 that
the marital status of employees working in automobile companies. It is clear
that 35.8 percentages of respondents are married and 64.2 percentages of
respondents are unmarried. It is also found from the above table that almost
2/3rd of respondents are unmarried.
 102

Table 4.3 Table showing organizational hierarchy of the respondents

S. No. Organizational No. of Percentage of

Hierarchy Respondents Respondents
1 Top Level 21 4.2
2 Middle Level 218 43.6
3 Shop Floor Level 261 52.2
Total 500 100
Source: Primary Data

Organizational Hierarchy
60
50
40
Percentage 30
52.2
20 43.6
10
0 4.2
Top Level Middle Level Shop Floor Level
Organizational Hierarchy

Figure 4.3 Figure showing organizational hierarchy of the respondents

Reference: Table 4.3.

Interpretation

The above Table 4.3 and Figurer 4.3 shows that 52.2 percentages of
respondents are from staff cadre and 43.6 percentages comprises of managerial
cadre and 4.2 percentages of respondents belong to top management. It can be
inferred from the above table that more work force has been involved for data
collection so that better suggestions can be provided to the top management to
eliminate its drawbacks and to introduce new ideas.
 103

Table 4.4 Table showing educational qualification of the Respondents

S. No. Educational No. of Percentage

Qualification Respondents
1 Up to High School 54 10.8
2 Bachelors Degree 194 38.8
3 Masters Degree 71 14.2
4 Diploma Holders 181 36.2
Total 500 100.0
Source: Primary Data

Educational Qualification
60
40
Percentages 20 10.8 38.8 14.2 36.2
0
Up to High Bachelors Masters Diploma
School Degree Degree Holders

Educational Qualification

Educational Qualification

Figure 4.4 Figure Depicting educational qualification of the Respondents

Reference: Table 4.4

Interpretation

From the above Table 4.4 and Figure 4.4 it has been inferred that
majority of respondents are Diploma holders and Bachelor degree holders and
14.2 percentages hold masters degree and only a marginal portion constitute to
school level. From the analysis it is inferred that the companies employ more
of diploma holders and bachelor degree holders so that they can have better
employee retention and master degree holders are employed for managerial
positions. The companies provide training to these employees and make them
settle in their company for a longer period.
 104

Table 4.5 Table showing gender wise classification of the respondents

No. of
S. No. Gender Percentage
Respondents
1 Male 431 86.2
2 Female 69 13.8
Total 500 100.0
Source: Primary Data

Gender wise Classification

100
80
84.2
60
Percentage
40
20
13.8
0
Male Female

Gender

Gender

Figure 4.5 Figure depicting gender-wise classification of the respondents

Reference: Table 4.5

Interpretation

From the above Table 4.5 and from Figure 4.5 it is inferred that
majority of respondents are male and only 13.8 percentages are female. The
company has employed more male members since it is a manufacturing
industry and the work may involve heavy machine operations. It can be
inferred that female employees may quit the job for varied reasons and so the
companies have advocated employing male members to have better
employment retention.
 105

Table 4.6 Table showing superior subordinate relationship based on

gender

Male Female Total

Factors
Mean Mean Mean
Approachability of superior by the subordinates 5.90 4.80 5.74
Recognition of employee for achievement by superiors 8.24 7.88 8.19
Teamwork and coordination 7.34 6.41 7.21
Respecting coworkers, subordinates by superiors 7.79 9.02 7.96
Clarity in explaining the task to be accomplished by the superior 7.85 7.70 7.83
Superiors follow an autocratic approach towards subordinates 8.51 8.15 8.46
Superiors act like a coach 6.81 8.41 7.04
Superior is a good counselor 7.73 7.15 7.65
Superior helps in completing the work assigned to subordinates 8.23 9.05 8.35
Superior is impartial with subordinates and co-workers 7.80 7.44 7.75
Superior is a good task master 8.42 8.59 8.44
Superior makes working environment pleasant 8.41 7.48 8.28
Superior considers suggestions and opinions of workers 8.85 9.41 8.93
Superior maintains friendly relationship 9.26 9.00 9.22
Superior cares for workers personal welfare 8.62 9.12 8.69
Source: Primary Data

Interpretation

In the above Table 4.6 it has been inferred that most of the
employees ranked Approachability of superior as the highest so that they are
able to execute the task easily. Team work and coordination and superior acts
like a coach are mostly influenced factors for superior subordinate
relationship. Superior maintains friendly relationship is given least rank by
considering their suggestions, caring for personal welfare. So that we can infer
from the analysis that employees feel that their superiors are good at getting
work done but do not have any personal touch. So the organization should
consider this point and should try to provide a cordial relationship so that it
 106

will increase the morale of employees which will increase employee retention.
The pictorial representation of the above interpretation is depicted in

Figure 4.6.

Figure showing superior subordinate

relationship based on gender
A Superior cares for workers personal
t Superior maintains friendly relationship
t
Superior considers suggestions and
r
i Superior makes working environment
b Superior is a good task master
u
Superior is impartial with subordinates
t
e Superior helps in completing the work
s Superior is a good counselor
Superiors act like a coach
Superiors follow an autocratic approach
Clarity in explaining the task to be
Respecting coworkers, subordinates by
Teamwork and coordination
Recognition of employee for
Approachability of superior by the

0 2 4 6 8 10
Mean

Female Mean Male Mean

Figure 4.6 Figure showing superior subordinate relationship based on

gender
Reference: Table 4.6
 107

Table 4.7 Table showing Superior Subordinate Relationship based on

age-wise classification

18-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 Above 55 Total

Factors
Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean
Approachability of superior by the subordinates 5.94 5.12 6.00 8.20 3.80 5.74
Recognition of employee for achievement by
8.04 8.38 8.35 9.70 8.20 8.19
superiors
Teamwork and coordination 7.76 5.87 7.68 5.00 7.70 7.21
Respecting coworkers, subordinates by superiors 8.38 7.16 7.00 9.70 7.50 7.96
Clarity in explaining the task to be accomplished
7.82 7.88 8.03 7.80 6.70 7.83
by the superior
Superiors follow an autocratic approach towards
8.58 8.37 7.78 7.20 9.90 8.46
subordinates
Superiors acts like a coach 7.24 6.39 7.27 6.90 8.30 7.04
Superior is a good counselor 7.63 8.02 6.81 8.30 6.50 7.65
Superior helps in completing the work assigned
8.13 8.83 8.89 6.40 9.10 8.35
to subordinates
Superior is impartial with subordinates and co-
7.55 8.44 6.72 9.10 7.50 7.75
workers
Superior is a good task master 8.31 8.49 9.17 8.70 8.70 8.44
Superior makes working environment pleasant 8.17 8.34 8.54 9.20 8.50 8.28
Superior considers suggestions and opinions of
8.61 9.50 9.35 8.90 9.89 8.93
workers
Superior maintains friendly relationship with
9.11 9.62 8.89 8.30 10.00 9.22
workers
Superior cares for workers personal welfare 8.43 9.22 9.51 7.70 7.80 8.69
Superior considers suggestions and opinions of
8.61 9.50 9.35 8.90 9.89 8.93
workers
Superior maintains friendly relationship with
9.11 9.62 8.89 8.30 10.00 9.22
workers
Superior cares for workers personal welfare 8.43 9.22 9.51 7.70 7.80 8.69
Superior considers suggestions and opinions of
8.61 9.50 9.35 8.90 9.89 8.93
workers
Superior maintains friendly relationship with
9.11 9.62 8.89 8.30 10.00 9.22
workers
Superior cares for workers personal welfare 8.43 9.22 9.51 7.70 7.80 8.69
Source: Primary Data
 108

Interpretation

From the above Table 4.7 it is inferred that most of the employees
ranked Approachability of superior as the highest so that they are able to
execute the task easily. Team work and coordination and superior acting like a
coach are mostly influenced factors for superior subordinate relationship.
Superior maintains friendly relationship has been least ranked followed by
considering of suggestions, caring for personal welfare. It is inferred from the
analysis that irrespective of age group employees feel that the superiors are
treating employees with fair and equitable to get the work done and there is no
bias within the work force, and this attitude of the superior makes subordinate
feel secured while executing a job which paves the way for retaining
employees as there is no partiality in treatment. This in turn will increase
employee retention. The pictorial representation of the above interpretation is
depicted in Figure4.7. in next page
 109

Chart showing superior subordinate

relationship based on age-wise
classification
Superior cares for workers personal welfare

Superior maintains friendly relationship

Superior considers suggestions and

Superior makes working environment

A Superior is a good task master

t
Superior is impartial with subordinates
t
r Superior helps in completing the work
i
Superior is a good counselor
b
u Superiors act like a coach
t
Superiors follow an autocratic approach
e
s Clarity in explaining the task to be

Respecting coworkers, subordinates by

Teamwork and coordination

Recognition of employee for achievement

Approachability of superior by the

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Mean

Above 55 Mean 46-55 Mean 36-45 Mean 26-35 Mean 18-25 Mean

Figure 4.7 Figure showing superior subordinate relationship based on

age-wise classification

Reference: Table 4.7

 110

Table 4.8 Table showing superior subordinate relationship based on

Organizational Hierarchy

Top Middle Shop floor Total

Factors
level level level
Mean Mean Mean Mean
Approachability of superior by the subordinates 6.05 5.47 5.93 5.74
Recognition of employee for achievement by
8.81 7.98 8.30 8.19
superiors
Teamwork and coordination 8.43 6.10 8.00 7.21
Respecting coworkers, subordinates by
6.71 7.34 8.58 7.96
superiors
Clarity in explaining the task to be
8.76 7.80 7.77 7.83
accomplished by the superior
Superiors follow an autocratic approach
7.86 8.42 8.55 8.46
towards subordinates
Superiors act like a coach 7.24 6.74 7.26 7.04
Superior is a good counselor 5.95 8.21 7.35 7.65
Superior helps in completing the work assigned
8.57 8.68 8.07 8.35
to subordinates
Superior is impartial with subordinates and co-
7.48 8.35 7.28 7.75
workers
Superior is a good task master 8.38 8.49 8.41 8.44
Superior makes working environment pleasant 7.90 8.35 8.24 8.28
Superior considers suggestions and opinions of
9.57 9.15 8.70 8.93
workers
Superior maintains friendly relationship with
9.29 9.30 9.15 9.22
workers
Superior cares for workers personal welfare 9.19 9.45 8.04 8.69
Source: Primary Data
 111

Interpretation

It has been inferred from Table 4.8 that most of employees

irrespective of their position have ranked approachability of superior and team
work as highest. Least ranking were given to friendly relationship and
respecting of co-workers and subordinates. So from the analysis it can be
inferred that irrespective of organizational hierarchy friendly relationship is
lacking among work force. This indicates that the organization culture is job-
oriented and very least importance is given to employees opinions and
suggestions. This aspect should be changed to increase employee retention
among employees in long run.

Table 4.9 Table showing superior subordinate relationship based on

educational qualification

Up to high Bachelor Master Diploma

Factors Total
school level Degree degree level
Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean
Approachability of superior by the
6.15 5.77 4.70 5.97 5.74
subordinates
Recognition of employee for achievement
8.60 7.83 8.41 8.35 8.19
by superiors
Teamwork and coordination 9.15 6.54 5.68 7.84 7.21
Respecting coworkers, subordinates by
7.96 7.48 7.63 8.58 7.96
superiors
Clarity in explaining the task to be
8.50 7.53 8.29 7.75 7.83
accomplished by the superior
Superiors follow an autocratic approach
7.81 8.69 8.41 8.46 8.46
towards subordinates
Superiors act like a coach 7.35 6.99 6.63 7.14 7.04
Superior is a good counselor 7.74 7.72 8.10 7.39 7.65
 112

Table No.4.9 (Continued)

Up to high Bachelor Master Diploma
Total
Factors school level Degree degree level
Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean
Superior helps in completing the work
8.83 8.32 8.60 8.14 8.35
assigned to subordinates
Superior is impartial with subordinates and
6.63 8.25 8.17 7.43 7.75
co-workers
Superior is a good task master 8.44 8.35 8.39 8.55 8.44
Superior makes working environment
7.69 8.44 8.32 8.28 8.28
pleasant
Superior considers suggestions and opinions
8.17 9.00 9.75 8.80 8.93
of workers
Source: Primary Data

Interpretation

It has been inferred from Table 4.9 that workers belonging to high
school level have ranked approachability of superior as highest and then rated
that superior is impartial. Bachelor degree holders have ranked approachability
of superiors as the highest, team work co-ordination as second influencing
factor and respecting of co-workers as third. Master degree holders have rated
approachability of superiors as the highest, team work co-ordination as second
influencing factor and respecting of co-workers has been thirdly ranked.
Diploma holders have ranked approachability as the first and ranked superior
acts like a coach and as a good counselor in second and third ranks
respectively. So it can be concluded that there exists a very good superior
subordinate relationship according to the qualification, a slight variation has
taken place for diploma holders where the superior acts as a coach and a
counsellor so that they are able to develop their skills and improve the
productivity.
 113

Table 4.10 Factors influencing employees to remain in the present

organization based on gender- wise classification

Attributes Male Female Total

Mean Mean Mean
Salary structure 1.91 1.95 1.92
Retirement benefits 6.79 7.27 6.86
Better Career Development 3.78 3.71 3.77
Working conditions 6.05 6.00 6.04
Supervision/Management 6.33 6.59 6.37
Fringe benefits 6.68 7.11 6.74
Recognition and rewards 6.55 6.62 6.56
Job security 3.61 3.59 3.60
Loyalty towards the
6.92 6.35 6.84
company
Company Image in the
6.41 6.27 6.39
society
Source: Primary Data

Interpretation

From the above Table 4.10 it has been inferred that most of the
employees ranked salary as the main reason to stay in the company. Job
Security is the second highest ranked factor for retention of employees in their
present organization. Retirement benefit is the least preferred factor by the
employees. This indicates that employees are more focused towards their
current monetary benefits and career development as the key factors. The
organization has chosen the best retention tactics to retain its employees. The
pictorial representation of the above interpretation is depicted in Figure4.10.
 114

Attributes Influencing Employee to remain

the organization with reference to gender
Company Image in the society

Loyalty towards the company

A
T Job security
T Recognition and reward
R
U Fringe benefits
B Supervision/Management
U
Working conditions
T
E Career Development
S
Retirement benefit

Salary

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Mean

Female Male

Figure 4.10 Figure depicting the factors influencing employees to remain

in the present organization

Reference Table 4.10

 115

Table No 4.11 Factors influencing employees to remain in organization

based on age-group

18- 26-35 36- 45-55 Above Total

Attributes
25 45 55
Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean
Salary structure 1.76 2.22 2.03 1.90 2.50 1.92
Retirement benefits 6.86 6.99 6.75 6.50 5.70 6.86
Better Career
3.69 3.84 3.75 4.60 4.20 3.77
Development
Working conditions 6.18 5.67 6.06 5.80 6.60 6.04
Supervision/Management 6.49 6.23 6.06 6.40 5.40 6.37
Fringe benefits 6.66 6.90 6.53 7.50 7.10 6.74
Recognition and rewards 6.60 6.40 6.61 7.30 6.30 6.56
Job security 3.52 3.63 3.94 3.40 4.60 3.60
Loyalty towards the
6.99 6.67 6.50 6.00 6.60 6.84
company
Company Image in the
6.41 6.25 7.06 5.60 6.00 6.39
society
Source: Primary Data

Interpretation

From the above Table 4.11 it has been inferred that from 18-45 of
age group salary has been ranked as first criteria which makes them to remain
the organization and from 46- 55 job security plays an important role as
employees have their own family commitments. Career development and job
security has been ranked in second position irrespective of the age group.
Retirement benefit has been given least importance between 18-45 of age
group and it has impact in the age group of 46-55. This clearly shows that the
 116

company has maintained good attributes to make its employees remain in the
present organization. From this we can infer that the employee retention rate is
high. The pictorial representation of the above interpretation is depicted in
Figure4.11.

Factors Relating employees to remain the

organization based on age wise
classification
Company Image in the society

Loyalty towards the company

Job security

Recognition and reward

Total
Fringe benefits
above 55
Attributes
Supervision/Management 46-55
36-45
Working conditions
26-35
Career Development
18-25
Retirement benefit

Salary

0 2 4 6 8

Mean

Figure No: 4.11 Figure exhibiting the factors influencing employees to

remain in organization based on age- wise classification
Reference: Table 4.11
 117

Table No 4.12 Factors influencing employees to remain in organization

based on hierarchy
Top Middle Shop Floor Total
Attributes Level Level Level
Mean Mean Mean Mean
Salary structure 2.15 2.30 1.59 1.92
Retirement benefits 6.55 6.76 6.96 6.86
Better Career Development 4.05 3.69 3.80 3.77
Working conditions 6.00 5.69 6.34 6.04
Supervision/Management 6.70 6.27 6.42 6.37
Fringe benefits 6.95 7.01 6.50 6.74
Recognition and rewards 7.40 6.24 6.75 6.56
Job security 3.25 3.81 3.47 3.60
Loyalty towards the
6.15 6.82 6.92 6.84
company
Company Image in the
5.70 6.47 6.39 6.39
society
Source: Primary Data
Interpretation
Top Level: Salary, Company image in the society and job security
has been ranked first rewards and recognition and retirement benefits has been
least ranked by the top level. Middle Level: Salary and job security ranked in
first position and company image and retirement benefit has been least ranked.
Shop Floor Level: Salary, career development and job security are ranked as
highest and least rated is rewards and recognition, supervision and
management and company image. It has been inferred that the organization
retention policy suits according to hierarchy where company image ranks
higher at top level and salary for middle level career development and job
 118

security for shop floor level. Whereas results in aggregate imply salary, job
security, career development which every individual aspires has been provided
by the organizations and hence we can infer that retention is higher in
automobile industries.

Factors influencing employees to remain

in organization with respect to
organizational hierarchy
Company Image in the society

Loyalty towards the company

Job security

Recognition and reward

Fringe benefits
Attributes
Supervision/Management Shop Floor Level
Middle Level
Working conditions
Top Level
Career Development

Retirement benefit

Salary

0 5 10

Mean

Figure No: 4.12 Figure showing factors influencing to remain in the

organization

Reference: Table 4.12

 119

Table No 4.13 Factors influencing employees to remain in organization

based on educational qualification

Up to high
Bachelor Master Diploma
school Total
Factors Degree degree level
level
Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean
Salary structure 1.59 2.19 2.17 1.64 1.92

Retirement benefits 6.83 7.05 6.86 6.65 6.86

Better Career
3.33 3.49 3.81 4.18 3.77
Development
Working conditions 6.31 5.76 5.83 6.34 6.04
Supervision/Management 6.22 6.52 6.06 6.37 6.37
Fringe benefits 6.98 6.83 7.00 6.46 6.74
Recognition and rewards 6.30 6.39 6.56 6.82 6.56
Job security 3.44 3.79 3.35 3.55 3.60
Loyalty towards the
7.39 6.91 6.67 6.66 6.84
company
Company Image in the
6.72 6.10 6.64 6.51 6.39
Society
Source: primary data

Interpretation

From the Table 4.13 it is very clear that irrespective of varied

educational qualification salary, career development, job security has been
ranked as the most influencing factor for the employees to remain in the
organization. Retirement benefit, company image are least ranking factor for
retention. It can be concluded from the analysis that the company has better
pay and good prospects for future growth with job security so that it is able to
retain its employees for a maximum length of service.
 120

Table No 4.14 Factors influencing employees to remain in organization

based on marital status

Attributes Married Un married Total

Mean Mean Mean
Salary structure 2.09 1.83 1.92
Retirement benefits 6.97 6.79 6.86
Better Career Development 3.68 3.81 3.77
Working conditions 5.94 6.09 6.04
Supervision/Management 6.18 6.47 6.37
Fringe benefits 6.87 6.67 6.74
Recognition and rewards 6.46 6.61 6.56
Job security 3.55 3.63 3.60
Loyalty towards the company 6.64 6.95 6.84
Company Image in the society 6.54 6.31 6.39
Source Primary Data

Interpretation
From the above Table 4.14 it is clear that Salary, job security and
career development is ranked highest in married category and only a
marginal variation in unmarried where career development ranks second and
job security as third highest but in a nutshell salary, job security and career
development has been the most influencing factor for employee retention and
retirement benefit and company image supervision and management are least
rated. Hence we can infer that from the analysis key factors of retention are
well maintained by the organization so that it will have a higher retention rate.
 121

Cross Tabulation

Table No 4.15 Various demographic factors with Length of service in the

present organization
H 0: There is no significant relationship between gender and Length of
service in the present organization
H 1: There is significant relationship between gender and Length of service
in the present organization
Gender * Length of service in present organization (in years)
Crosstab

Lengt h of service in pres ent organiz ation (i n years )

Less than 5 6-10 11-15 16-20 Above 20 Total
Gender M ale Count 309 67 24 20 11 431
Ex pec ted Count 315.5 65.5 20.7 19.0 10.3 431.0
% wit hin Gender 71.7% 15.5% 5. 6% 4. 6% 2. 6% 100.0%
Female Count 57 9 0 2 1 69
Ex pec ted Count 50.5 10.5 3. 3 3. 0 1. 7 69.0
% wit hin Gender 82.6% 13.0% .0% 2. 9% 1. 4% 100.0%
Total Count 366 76 24 22 12 500
Ex pec ted Count 366.0 76.0 24.0 22.0 12.0 500.0
% wit hin Gender 73.2% 15.2% 4. 8% 4. 4% 2. 4% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig.
Value df (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square a
5.767 4 .217
Likelihood Ratio 9.121 4 .058
Linear-by-Linear
3.583 1 .058
Association
N of Valid Cases 500

Interpretation
The above Table 4.15 indicates that there is no significant
association between gender and length of service. It can be inferred that
irrespective of gender the organization policies remain the same and hence
there is no association between gender and length of service.
 122

Table No 4.16 Table showing relationship between Age Group and

Length of Service in present organisation

H0: There is no relationship between age and Length of service in the

present organization

H1: There is significant relationship between age and Length of service in

the present organization

Age Group (i n years) * Length of service in present organization (in yea rs) Crossta bul ation

Length of service in present organization (in years)

Less t han 5 6-10 11-15 16-20 Total
Age Group 18-25 Count 288 13 2 0 303
(in years) Ex pec ted Count 231.5 48.1 15.2 8. 2 303.0
% within A ge
95.0% 4. 3% .7% .0% 100.0%
Group (in years)
26-35 Count 68 61 3 4 136
Ex pec ted Count 103.9 21.6 6. 8 3. 7 136.0
% within A ge
50.0% 44.9% 2. 2% 2. 9% 100.0%
Group (in years)
36-45 Count 10 2 19 9 40
Ex pec ted Count 30.6 6. 3 2. 0 1. 1 40.0
% within A ge
25.0% 5. 0% 47.5% 22.5% 100.0%
Group (in years)
Total Count 366 76 24 13 479
Ex pec ted Count 366.0 76.0 24.0 13.0 479.0
% within A ge
76.4% 15.9% 5. 0% 2. 7% 100.0%
Group (in years)

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig.
Value df (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 364.272 a 6 .000
Likelihood Ratio 245.031 6 .000
Linear-by-Linear
200.557 1 .000
Association
N of Valid Cases 479

Interpretation

There is significant association between age and length of service.

 123

Table 4.17 Table showing relationship between Organizational Hierarchy

and Length of Service in present organisation

H 0: There is no association between organizational Hierarchy and Length of

service in the present organization

H 1: There is significant association between organizational Hierarchy and

Length of service in the present organization

Crosstab

Length of s ervice in pres ent organization (in years )

Less than 5 6-10 11-15 16-20 Above 20 Total
Organizational Top Level Count 3 3 5 6 4 21
Hierarchy Expected Count 15.4 3.2 1.0 .9 .5 21.0
% within Organizational
14.3% 14.3% 23.8% 28.6% 19.0% 100.0%
Hierarchy
Middle Level Count 126 54 16 16 6 218
Expected Count 159.6 33.1 10.5 9.6 5.2 218.0
% within Organizational
57.8% 24.8% 7.3% 7.3% 2.8% 100.0%
Hierarchy
Shop Floor Level Count 237 19 3 0 2 261
Expected Count 191.1 39.7 12.5 11.5 6.3 261.0
% within Organizational
90.8% 7.3% 1.1% .0% .8% 100.0%
Hierarchy
Total Count 366 76 24 22 12 500
Expected Count 366.0 76.0 24.0 22.0 12.0 500.0
% within Organizational
73.2% 15.2% 4.8% 4.4% 2.4% 100.0%
Hierarchy

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig.
Value df (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 148.893 a 8 .000
Likelihood Ratio 130.712 8 .000
Linear-by-Linear
109.644 1 .000
Association
N of Valid Cases 500
4 ll (26 7%) h td tl th 5 Th

Interpretation

There is significant association between organizational

Hierarchy and Length of service in the present organization.
 124

Table No 4.18 Table showing relationship between educational

background and Length of Service in present organization

H0: There is no relationship between educational background and Length of

service in the present organization
H1: There is significant relationship between educational background and
Length of service in the present organization
Cr osstab

Lengt h of servic e in present organization (in years)

Less than 5 6-10 11-15 16-20 Ab ove 20 Total

Ed uc atio nal Up to High Co un t 51 2 0 0 1 54
Ba ck grou nd Sc ho ol Ex pe cted Count 39.5 8. 2 2. 6 2. 4 1. 3 54.0
% wit hin Edu ca tion al
94.4% 3. 7% .0% .0% 1. 9% 100.0%
Ba ck grou nd
Ba ch elor Co un t 129 42 11 12 0 194
De gree Ex pe cted Count 142.0 29.5 9. 3 8. 5 4. 7 194.0
% wit hin Edu ca tion al
66.5% 21.6% 5. 7% 6. 2% .0% 100.0%
Ba ck grou nd
Master Co un t 28 18 11 8 6 71
De gree Ex pe cted Count 52.0 10.8 3. 4 3. 1 1. 7 71.0
% wit hin Edu ca tion al
39.4% 25.4% 15.5% 11.3% 8. 5% 100.0%
Ba ck grou nd
Di ploma Co un t 158 14 2 2 5 181
Ho lder Ex pe cted Count 132.5 27.5 8. 7 8. 0 4. 3 181.0
% wit hin Edu ca tion al
87.3% 7. 7% 1. 1% 1. 1% 2. 8% 100.0%
Ba ck grou nd
Total Co un t 366 76 24 22 12 500
Ex pe cted Count 366.0 76.0 24.0 22.0 12.0 500.0
% wit hin Edu ca tion al
73.2% 15.2% 4. 8% 4. 4% 2. 4% 100.0%
Ba ck grou nd

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig.
Value df (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square a
98.415 12 .000
Likelihood Ratio 103.025 12 .000
Linear-by-Linear
.214 1 .643
Association
N of Valid Cases 500

Interpretation
There is significant association between educational background
and Length of service in the present organization.
 125

Table No 4.19 Table showing relationship between Marital Status and

Length of Service in present organisation

H0: There is no significant relationship between marital status and Length of

service in the present organization.
H1: There is significant relationship between marital status and Length of
service in the present organization.
Crosstab

Length of service in pres ent organization (in years)

Less than 5 6-10 11-15 16-20 Above 20 Total
Marital Married Count 68 57 21 21 12 179
status Expected Count 131.0 27.2 8.6 7.9 4.3 179.0
% within Marital status 38.0% 31.8% 11.7% 11.7% 6.7% 100.0%
Unmarried Count 298 19 3 1 0 321
Expected Count 235.0 48.8 15.4 14.1 7.7 321.0
% within Marital status 92.8% 5.9% .9% .3% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 366 76 24 22 12 500
Expected Count 366.0 76.0 24.0 22.0 12.0 500.0
% within Marital status 73.2% 15.2% 4.8% 4.4% 2.4% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig.
Value df (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square a
181.531 4 .000
Likelihood Ratio 189.156 4 .000
Linear-by-Linear
150.711 1 .000
Association
N of Valid Cases 500

Interpretation

There is significant association between marital status and Length of

service in the present organization.
 126

Table No. 4.20 Multiple regression models for job satisfaction on work
environment and culture.
Descriptive Statistics
Std.
Mean Deviation N

Job Satisfaction 4.1690 .58683 496

Working
4.3276 .56157 496
Environment

Organizational
4.1781 .56375 496
Culture

Model Summary

Std. Error
Adjusted of the
Model R R Square R Square Estimate

1 .734(a) .539 .537 .39917

a.Predictors: (Constant), Organizational Culture, Working Environment

ANOVA(b)

Sum of Mean
Model Squares Df Square F Sig.

1 Regression 91.911 2 45.955 288.424 .000(a)

Residual 78.551 493 .159

Total 170.462 495

a. Predictors: (Constant), Organizational Culture, Working Environment

b. Dependent Variable: Job Satisfaction
 127

Coefficients (a)

Un standardized Standardized
Model Coefficients Coefficients

Std.
B Error Beta t Sig.

1 (Constant) .00
.602 .158 3.815
0

Working .00
.204 .037 .195 5.526
Environment 0

Organizational .00
.643 .037 .618 17.515
Culture 0

a. Dependent Variable: Job Satisfaction

Model: Job satisfaction = 0.602 + 0.204 Working Environment + 0.643

Organization Culture

Interpretation

Both the variables Working Environment and Organization Culture are

highly significant in determining the job satisfaction.

Organization Culture is the main influencing variable and Working

Environment is the next influencing variable.

The model is significant and explains about 54% variation in job satisfaction.
 128

Table 4.21 Table showing perception of employees to various factors

based on Gender
H0: Gender difference does not affect the perception on various factors under
study.
H1: Gender difference affects the perception on various factors under study.
Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equal ity of Means
95% Confi dence
Si g. Mean Interval of the
(2-taile Di ffere Std. Error Di fference
F Si g. t df d) nce Di fference Lower Upper
Em ployee Equal variances
.535 .465 -.789 495 .430 -.05839 .07397 -.2037 .08695
Retention as sumed
Strategies Equal variances
-.857 97.679 .394 -.05839 .06814 -.1936 .07683
not as sum ed
Working Equal variances
.039 .844 .337 495 .736 .02459 .07295 -.1187 .16792
Environment as sumed
Equal variances
.335 90.898 .738 .02459 .07340 -.1212 .17039
not as sum ed
Working Place Equal variances
5.756 .017 -1.565 495 .118 -.09814 .06269 -.2213 .02503
as sumed
Equal variances
-1.838 105.6 .069 -.09814 .05339 -.2040 .00772
not as sum ed
Family Welfare Equal variances
1.812 .179 -1.060 494 .290 -.08845 .08347 -.2524 .07555
Measures as sumed
Equal variances
-1.142 97.139 .256 -.08845 .07743 -.2421 .06522
not as sum ed
Health & Safefy Equal variances
1.459 .228 .858 494 .392 .05992 .06987 -.0774 .19719
Measures as sumed
Equal variances
.936 98.237 .352 .05992 .06401 -.0671 .18694
not as sum ed
R_R Equal variances
.001 .971 -.515 494 .606 -.04570 .08866 -.2199 .12849
as sumed
Equal variances
-.533 93.803 .595 -.04570 .08571 -.2159 .12448
not as sum ed
Organizational Equal variances
3.715 .054 .552 494 .581 .04039 .07320 -.1034 .18421
Culture as sumed
Equal variances
.652 106.3 .516 .04039 .06200 -.0825 .16330
not as sum ed
Job Satisfi cation Equal variances
.346 .557 .388 494 .698 .02959 .07621 -.1201 .17932
as sumed
Equal variances
.403 94.003 .688 .02959 .07348 -.1163 .17548
not as sum ed

Interpretation

From the above Table 4.21 it has been inferred that gender
difference does not affect the perception on various factors under study. Hence
it can be concluded that retention strategies, working environment, working
place, rewards and recognition, organizational culture relates to job
satisfaction which will increase employee retention irrespective of gender.
 129

Table No 4.22 Table showing perception of employees to various factors

based on marital status

H0: Marital status does not affect the perception on various factors under
study.
H1: Marital status affects the perception on various factors under study.
Independent Samples Test

Levene's Tes t
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Sig. Mean Std. Error Di fference
F Sig. t df (2-tailed) Di fference Di fference Lower Upper
Employee Equal variances
4.060 .044 -.623 495 .534 -.03318 .05329 -.1379 .07153
Retention assumed
Strategies Equal variances
-.602 332.80 .548 -.03318 .05516 -.1417 .07533
not assumed
Working Equal variances
.107 .744 1.102 495 .271 .05785 .05249 -.0453 .16097
Environm ent assumed
Equal variances
1.110 377.29 .268 .05785 .05210 -.0446 .16029
not assumed
Working Place Equal variances
.095 .758 -.196 495 .845 -.00887 .04527 -.0978 .08007
assumed
Equal variances
-.197 377.36 .844 -.00887 .04493 -.0972 .07948
not assumed
Family Welfare Equal variances
.016 .900 2.031 494 .043 .12180 .05996 .00398 .23961
Measures assumed
Equal variances
2.029 368.19 .043 .12180 .06003 .00375 .23984
not assumed
Health & Safefy Equal variances
1.363 .244 1.690 494 .092 .08488 .05024 -.0138 .18359
Measures assumed
Equal variances
1.670 356.45 .096 .08488 .05084 -.0151 .18487
not assumed
R_R Equal variances
6.544 .011 .731 494 .465 .04668 .06387 -.0788 .17217
assumed
Equal variances
.704 329.75 .482 .04668 .06632 -.0838 .17715
not assumed
Organizational Equal variances
.000 1.000 1.163 494 .245 .06128 .05269 -.0422 .16480
Culture assumed
Equal variances
1.174 379.46 .241 .06128 .05222 -.0414 .16395
not assumed
Job Equal variances
.332 .565 .168 494 .866 .00925 .05492 -.0987 .11715
Satisficati on assumed
Equal variances
.166 355.68 .868 .00925 .05562 -.1001 .11862
not assumed

Interpretation

From the above Table 4.22 it has been found that the significance
value is greater than 0.05 for all the factors except for Family Welfare
Measures, it is concluded that marital status does not affect the perception on
various factors under study except for Family Welfare Measures. The
perception of unmarried employees on family welfare measures is better than
married employees.
 130

Table 4.23 Table showing employees perception towards various factors

with reference to age groups

H0:The perception of employees in different age groups on various factors is

same.
H1:The perception of employees in different age groups on various factors is
not same.
ANOVA

Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Employee Retention Between Groups 1.662 4 .416 1.282 .276
Strategies Within Groups 159.489 492 .324
Total 161.151 496
Working Environment Between Groups 1.387 4 .347 1.100 .356
Within Groups 155.168 492 .315
Total 156.555 496
Working Place Between Groups 1.291 4 .323 1.383 .239
Within Groups 114.888 492 .234
Total 116.180 496
Family Welfare Measures Between Groups 2.508 4 .627 1.521 .195
Within Groups 202.394 491 .412
Total 204.902 495
Health & Safefy Measures Between Groups 1.905 4 .476 1.652 .160
Within Groups 141.558 491 .288
Total 143.463 495
R_R Between Groups 3.675 4 .919 1.987 .095
Within Groups 227.110 491 .463
Total 230.786 495
Organizational Culture Between Groups 1.043 4 .261 .819 .513
Within Groups 156.275 491 .318
Total 157.318 495
Job Satisfication Between Groups .899 4 .225 .651 .626
Within Groups 169.563 491 .345
Total 170.462 495

Interpretation

Table No 4.23 depicts that the significance value is greater than 0.05
for all the factors, the perception of employees in different age groups on
various factors are same. However, the perception on rewards & recognition is
marginally significant at 10% level for different age groups.
 131

Table 4.24 Table showing employee perception towards various retention

factors with reference to length of service
H0: The perception of employees with different length of service on various
factors is same.
H1: The perception of employees with different length of service on various
factors is not same.
ANOVA

Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Employee Retention Strategies Between Groups 3.079 4 .770 2.396 .050
Within Groups 158.072 492 .321
Total 161.151 496
Working Environment Between Groups 4.923 4 1.231 3.993 .003
Within Groups 151.632 492 .308
Total 156.555 496
Working Place Between Groups 2.610 4 .652 2.826 .024
Within Groups 113.570 492 .231
Total 116.180 496
Family Welfare Measures Between Groups 1.509 4 .377 .911 .458
Within Groups 203.394 491 .414
Total 204.902 495
Health & Safefy Measures Between Groups 8.580 4 2.145 7.808 .000
Within Groups 134.883 491 .275
Total 143.463 495
R_R Between Groups 9.799 4 2.450 5.443 .000
Within Groups 220.987 491 .450
Total 230.786 495
Organizational Culture Between Groups 7.144 4 1.786 5.839 .000
Within Groups 150.174 491 .306
Total 157.318 495
Job Satisfication Between Groups 6.840 4 1.710 5.131 .000
Within Groups 163.622 491 .333
Total 170.462 495

Interpretation

Table 4.24 depicts that the significance value is less than 0.05 for all
the factors except Family welfare measures, the perceptions of employees with
different length of service on various factors are not same. Perception on
family welfare measures does not depend on length of service, but only on
marital status.
 132

Table 4.25 Table showing perception of employees on various retention

factors with reference to Organizational Hierarchy
H0:The perception of employees in different Organizational Hierarchy is same
on various factors.
H1:The perception of employees in different Organizational Hierarchy is not
same on various factors.
ANOVA

Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Em ployee Retention Between Groups 5.235 2 2.618 8.294 .000
Strategies Within Groups 155.916 494 .316
Total 161.151 496
Working Environm ent Between Groups 1.884 2 .942 3.008 .050
Within Groups 154.671 494 .313
Total 156.555 496
Working Place Between Groups 2.674 2 1.337 5.819 .003
Within Groups 113.505 494 .230
Total 116.180 496
Family Welfare Meas ures Between Groups 4.510 2 2.255 5.548 .004
Within Groups 200.392 493 .406
Total 204.902 495
Health & Safefy Meas ures Between Groups 3.488 2 1.744 6.143 .002
Within Groups 139.975 493 .284
Total 143.463 495
R_R Between Groups 2.569 2 1.285 2.775 .063
Within Groups 228.217 493 .463
Total 230.786 495
Organizational Culture Between Groups 1.729 2 .865 2.740 .066
Within Groups 155.589 493 .316
Total 157.318 495
Job Satisfication Between Groups 1.833 2 .916 2.679 .070
Within Groups 168.629 493 .342
Total 170.462 495

Interpretation

Table 4.25 exhibits that the significance value is less than 0.10 for
all the factors, the perception of employees in different Organizational
Hierarchy is not same on various factors at 10% level of significance.
 133

Table 4.26 Table showing perception of employees on various retention

factors with reference to Educational Qualification
H0:The perception of employees with different educational background is
same on various factors.
H1:The perception of employees with different educational background is not
same on various factors.
ANOVA

Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Si g.
Employee Retention Between Groups 5.172 3 1.724 5.449 .001
Strategies Within Groups 155.980 493 .316
Total 161.151 496
Worki ng Envi ronm ent Between Groups 1.199 3 .400 1.269 .284
Within Groups 155.355 493 .315
Total 156.555 496
Worki ng Place Between Groups 2.026 3 .675 2.917 .034
Within Groups 114.153 493 .232
Total 116.180 496
Famil y Welfare Between Groups 6.158 3 2.053 5.082 .002
Measures Within Groups 198.744 492 .404
Total 204.902 495
Health & Safefy Between Groups .936 3 .312 1.077 .358
Measures Within Groups 142.527 492 .290
Total 143.463 495
R_R Between Groups 3.579 3 1.193 2.583 .053
Within Groups 227.207 492 .462
Total 230.786 495
Organizational Between Groups .741 3 .247 .776 .508
Culture Within Groups 156.577 492 .318
Total 157.318 495
Job Satis fication Between Groups 2.449 3 .816 2.390 .068
Within Groups 168.013 492 .341
Total 170.462 495

Interpretation

From Table 4.26 it has been inferred that the significance value is
less than 0.10 for factors employee retention strategies, working place, and
family welfare measures, rewards and recognition, job satisfaction, the
perception of employees with different educational background is not same on
various factors at 5% level of significance for these factors. The other factors,
the difference in perception is not significant so null hypothesis is rejected.
 134

Non-parametric tests
Table 4.27 Ranking on factors influenced to remain in the organization
based on gender
H0:The ranking of male and female on various factors influence to remain in
the organization are same.
H1:The ranking of male and female on various factors influence to remain in
the organization are not same.
Test Statisticsa

Yates ' Continuity

Correction
Chi- Asymp. Chi- Asymp.
N Median Square df Sig. Square df Sig.
Salary 465 1.00 .078 1 .780 .020 1 .887
Retirement benefit 466 7.00 3.599 1 .058 3.111 1 .078
Career Development 465 3.00 .813 1 .367 .589 1 .443
Working conditions 464 6.00 .050 1 .822 .008 1 .928
Supervision/Management 465 6.00 .936 1 .333 .696 1 .404
Fringe benefits 466 7.00 1.846 1 .174 1.490 1 .222
Recognition and reward 466 7.00 .059 1 .808 .012 1 .914
Job security 467 3.00 .947 1 .331 .694 1 .405
Loyalty towards the company 466 7.00 1.674 1 .196 1.348 1 .246
Company Image in the s ociety 465 6.00 .265 1 .607 .146 1 .703
a. Grouping Variable: Gender

Interpretation

As per Table 4.27 the sample respondents were grouped gender

wise. Chi-square test was applied. Since the significance value is greater than
0.05 for all the factors, it may be inferred that ranking of male and female on
various factors which influence to remain in the organization was same. Both
male and female are satisfied with present organization and retention is good.
 135

Table 4.28 Ranking on factors influenced to remain in the organization

based on age groups

H0:The ranking of employees in different age groups on various factors

influence to remain in the organization are same.
H1:The ranking of employees in different age groups on various factors
influence to remain in the organization are not same.

Test Statisticsa,b

Chi-Square df As ymp. Sig.

Salary 12.889 4 .012
Retirement benefit 2.728 4 .604
Career Development 2.136 4 .711
Working conditions 3.229 4 .520
Supervis ion/Managem ent 3.115 4 .539
Fringe benefits 3.903 4 .419
Recognition and reward 1.467 4 .833
Job s ecurity 1.079 4 .898
Loyalty towards the com pany 3.352 4 .501
Company Image in the society 2.899 4 .575
a. Kruskal Wal lis Test
b. Grouping Variable: Age Group (in years)

Interpretation

As per Table 4.28 the sample respondents were grouped based on

age. Chi-square test was applied. Since the significance value is greater than
0.05 for all the factors except for salary, it may be inferred that ranking of
employees in different age groups on various factors which influence to
remain in the organization were same. Employees of all age group are
satisfied with the above mentioned factors and so the organization has adopted
a good retention plan. However, there is a significant difference between age
groups on ranking for the factor salary. The ranking preference for salary is
diminishing as the age of employees grows up.
 136

Table 4.29 Ranking on factors influenced to remain in the organization

based on length of service
H0:The ranking of employees with different lengths of service on various
factors influence to remain in the organization are same.
H1:The ranking of employees with different lengths of service on various
factors influence to remain in the organization are not same.

Test Statisticsa,b

Chi-Square df Asymp. Sig.

Salary 4.740 4 .315
Retirement benefit 1.893 4 .755
Career Development 1.333 4 .856
Working conditions 2.272 4 .686
Supervision/Management 3.881 4 .422
Fringe benefits 2.614 4 .624
Recognition and reward 1.239 4 .872
Job security 1.726 4 .786
Loyalty towards the company 2.356 4 .671
Company Image in the society 2.584 4 .630
a. Kruskal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable: Length of service in present organization (in
years)

Interpretation

Table 4.29 shows the various factors which influence the employees
to remain in the present organization based on length of service Since the
significance value is greater than 0.05 for all the factors, it may be inferred
that ranking of employees with different lengths of service on various factors
influence to remain in the organization were found to be same. Since length of
service determines retention, it can be concluded that the organization has
high retention of its employees.
 137

Table 4.30 Ranking on factors influenced to remain in the organization

based on organizational hierarchy
H0:The ranking of employees in different organizational hierarchy on various
factors influence to remain in the organization are same.
H1:The ranking of employees in different organizational hierarchy on various
factors influence to remain in the organization are not same.

Test Statisticsa,b

Chi-Square df As ymp. Sig.

Salary 23.808 2 .000
Retirem ent benefit .820 2 .663
Career Development .346 2 .841
Working condi tions 7.762 2 .021
Supervis ion/Management 1.039 2 .595
Fringe benefits 10.149 2 .006
Recognition and reward 7.442 2 .024
Job s ecurity 1.135 2 .567
Loyalty towards the company 1.429 2 .489
Com pany Im age in the s ociety 1.100 2 .577
a. Krus kal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable: Organizational Hierarchy

Interpretation

As per Table 4.30 the sample respondents were grouped on

organizational hierarchy basis. Chi-square test was applied. There is a
significant difference in the rankings on salary, working conditions, fringe
benefits and recognition & rewards are greater than 0.05 with respect to
organizational hierarchy .For the other factors, there is no significant
difference in the rankings.
 138

Table 4.31 Ranking on factors influenced to remain in the organization

based on educational qualification
H0:The ranking of employees in different educational background on various
factors influence to remain in the organization are same.
H1:The ranking of employees in different educational background on various
factors influence to remain in the organization are not same.

Test Statisticsa,b

Chi-Squ are df As ym p. Sig.

Sa lary 28 .17 0 3 .0 00
Retire me nt ben efi t 2.499 3 .4 76
Career Develop me nt 10 .04 9 3 .0 18
Working condition s 5.170 3 .1 60
Su pe rvis ion /Ma na gem en t 2.379 3 .4 98
Fring e b ene fits 6.957 3 .0 73
Reco gni tion an d re ward 4.154 3 .2 45
Job s ecu rity 2.401 3 .4 93
Lo yal ty to wa rds the comp an y 4.670 3 .1 98
Com pan y Im ag e in th e s ocie ty 3.209 3 .3 61
a. Kruskal Wallis Tes t
b. Grouping Variable : Educational Ba ckg rou nd

Interpretation

The Table 4.31 exhibits grouping of respondents in four different

educational qualifications. As per this table, there is a significant difference in
the rankings on salary, career development and, fringe benefits with respect to
educational background at 10% level of significance. For the other factors,
there is no significant difference in the rankings.
 139

Table 4.32 Ranking on factors influenced to remain in the organization

based on marital status

H0:The ranking of married and unmarried employees on various factors

influence to remain in the organization is same.
H1:The ranking of married and unmarried employees on various factors
influence to remain in the organization is not same.

Te st Sta tisti csa

Yates ' Continuity

Correction
Chi- As ymp. Chi- As ymp.
N Median Square df Si g. Square df Si g.
Salary 465 1. 00 .925 1 .336 .741 1 .389
Retirement benefit 466 7. 00 .020 1 .889 .002 1 .966
Career Development 465 3. 00 .260 1 .610 .170 1 .680
W orking conditions 464 6. 00 .094 1 .760 .043 1 .836
Supervision/Management 465 6. 00 .734 1 .392 .577 1 .447
Fringe benefi ts 466 7. 00 3. 416 1 .065 3. 053 1 .081
Recognit ion and reward 466 7. 00 .017 1 .895 .001 1 .973
Job security 467 3. 00 .028 1 .867 .004 1 .948
Loyalty towards the company 466 7. 00 1. 441 1 .230 1. 218 1 .270
Company Image in t he society 465 6. 00 1. 202 1 .273 .999 1 .318
a. Grouping Variable: Marital stat us

Interpretation

As per Table 4.32 the sample respondents were grouped based on

marital status .Chi-square test was applied. The ranking of married and
unmarried employees on various factors influence to remain in the
organization were same.
 140

Mann-Whitney Test
Table 4.33 Table showing superior subordinate relationship with respect
to gender
H0 :There is a significant difference in ranking of male and female on various
factors with respect to superior subordinate relationship.

H1:There is no significant difference in ranking of male and female on various

factors with respect to superior subordinate relationship.

Test Statistics a

Mann- As ymp.
Whitney Wilcoxon Sig.
U W Z (2-tailed)
Approachability of s uperior 11184.00 13395.0 -1.774 .076
Recognition of employee for achievement 12153.00 14298.0 -.565 .572
Teamwork and coordination 11459.00 13670.0 -1.490 .136
Respecting coworkers, subordinates 10900.00 87536.0 -2.024 .043
Clarity in explaining the task to be accom plished 12717.00 14928.0 -.221 .825
Superi ors follow an autocratic approach 12361.50 14572.5 -.579 .563
Superi ors act like a coach 10103.50 86739.5 -2.829 .005
Superi or is a good counselor 11858.50 14069.5 -1.086 .277
Superi or helps in completing the work 11224.50 88252.5 -1.726 .084
Superi or is impartial 12196.00 14407.0 -.714 .475
Superi or is a task m aster 12614.00 89250.0 -.292 .770
Superi or makes working environment pleasant 11075.50 13286.5 -1.847 .065
Superi or considers others s uggestions and opinions 11863.50 88499.5 -1.051 .293
Superi or maintains friendly relationship 12338.00 14549.0 -.603 .547
Superi or cares for workers personal welfare 12090.00 89118.0 -.853 .394
a. Grouping Variable: Gender

Interpretation

The Table 4.33 depicts the sample of respondents based on gender.

Chi-square test has been applied to test the hypothesis. It has been found that
there is no significant difference in the rankings of male and females on
various factors with respect to superior subordinate relationship in the
organization for the following factor like recognition of employee for
achievement, teamwork and coordination, clarity in explaining the task to be
accomplished, superiors follow an autocratic approach, Superior is a good
counsellor ,Superior is impartial ,Superior is a task master ,Superior considers
others suggestions and opinions ,Superior maintains friendly relationship.
 141

Superior cares for workers personal welfare and there is significant

difference in the rankings of male and females on various factors at 10%
significance level with respect to superior subordinate relationship in the
organization for the following factors like

Approachability of superior where females have given better

ranking than males, respecting coworkers, subordinates, superior acts like a
coach, superior helps in completing the work and superior makes work
environment pleasant has been ranked better by male employees rather than
female employees.

Table 4.34 Table showing superior subordinate relationship with respect

to age group
H0:There is a significant difference in ranking of employees on various factors
with respect to superior subordinate relationship based on age group
H1:There is no significant difference in ranking of employees on various
factors with respect to superior subordinate relationship based on age group
Test Statistics(a,b)

Asymp.
Chi-Square df Sig.
Approachability of superior 6.356 4 .174
Recognition of employee for achievement 1.655 4 .799
Teamwork and coordination 15.066 4 .005
Respecting coworkers, subordinates 9.034 4 .060
Clarity in explaining the task to be accomplished .752 4 .945
Superiors follow an autocratic approach 3.713 4 .446
Superiors act like a coach 3.881 4 .422
Superior is a good counselor 3.121 4 .538
Superior helps in completing the work 6.676 4 .154
Superior is impartial 8.020 4 .091
Superior is a task master 1.734 4 .784
Superior makes working environment pleasant 1.166 4 .884
Superior considers others suggestions and opinions 5.714 4 .222
Superior maintains friendly relationship 2.189 4 .701
Superior cares for workers personal welfare 4.684 4 .321
a Kruskal Wallis Test
b Grouping Variable: Age Group (in years)
 142

Interpretation
The Table 4.33 depicts the sample of respondents based on age
group. Chi-square test has been applied to test the hypothesis. It has been
found that the rankings of employees in different age groups on various factors
with respect to superior subordinate relationship in the organization are same
for the following factors like approachability of superior , recognition of
employee for achievement ,clarity in explaining the task to be accomplished ,
superiors follow an autocratic approach
Superior is a good counsellor , superior helps in completing the
work, superiors act like a coach, Superior is a task master , superior makes
working environment pleasant
Superior considers others suggestions and opinions , superior
maintains friendly relationship, superior cares for workers personal welfare .
There is significant difference in the rankings of male on females on
various factors with respect to superior subordinate relationship in the
organization for the following factors at 10% significance level
Teamwork and coordination Employees in age group 46-55 have
better preference for teamwork followed by employees in age group 26-35.
Respecting coworkers, subordinates Employees in age group 36-
45 have better preference for teamwork followed by employees in age group
26-35.
Superior is impartial Employees in age group 36-45 have better
preference for teamwork followed by employees in age group above 55.
 143

Table 4.35 Table showing superior subordinate relationship with respect

to length of service
H0:There is a significant difference in ranking of employees on various factors
with respect to superior subordinate relationship based on length of service
H1:There is no significant difference in ranking of employees on various
factors with respect to superior subordinate relationship based on length of
service

Test Statistics a,b

Chi-Square df Asymp. Sig.

Approachability of superior 3.060 4 .548
Recognition of employee for achievement 5.667 4 .225
Teamwork and coordination 8.662 4 .070
Respecting coworkers, subordinates 2.850 4 .583
Clarity in explaining the task to be accomplished .526 4 .971
Superiors follow an autocratic approach 1.836 4 .766
Superiors act like a coach 3.390 4 .495
Superior is a good counselor 2.085 4 .720
Superior helps in completing the work 3.742 4 .442
Superior is impartial 3.607 4 .462
Superior is a task master .923 4 .921
Superior makes working environment pleasant 1.821 4 .769
Superior considers others suggestions and opinions 8.410 4 .078
Superior maintains friendly relationship 2.004 4 .735
Superior cares for workers personal welfare 2.222 4 .695
a. Kruskal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable: Length of service in present organization (in years)

Interpretation

The Table 4.35 depicts employees views on the various factors

which influence them to remain in the organization based on length o service
as basis. The results of the analysis were as follows

The rankings of employees with lengths of service with respect to

superior subordinate relationship in the organization are same for the
 144

following factors namely approachability of superior , recognition of

employee for achievement, respecting coworkers, subordinates ,clarity in
explaining the task to be accomplished ,superiors follow an autocratic
approach, superiors act like a coach, superior is a good counsellor .
Superior helps in completing the work, superior is a task master,
superior is impartial
Superior makes working environment pleasant, superior maintains
friendly relationship, superior cares for workers personal welfare.
There is significant difference in the rankings of employees with
different lengths of service with respect to superior subordinate relationship in
the organization for the following factors at 10% significance level for
teamwork and coordination and superior considers others suggestions and
opinions.
 145

Table 4.36 Table showing superior subordinate relationship with respect

to organizational hierarchy
H1:There is significant difference in ranking of employees in different
organizational hierarchy on various factors with respect to superior
subordinate relationship.
H0:There is no significant difference in ranking of employees in different
organizational hierarchy on various factors with respect to superior
subordinate.
Te st Statisticsa,b

Chi-Square df Asymp. Sig.

Approachability of superior 2.096 2 .351
Recognition of employee for achievement 1.047 2 .592
Teamwork and coordination 17.298 2 .000
Respecting coworkers, subordinates 9.302 2 .010
Clarity in explaining the task to be accomplished .832 2 .660
Superiors follow an autocratic approach .624 2 .732
Superiors act like a coach 1.662 2 .436
Superior is a good counselor 8.136 2 .017
Superior helps in completing the work 3.131 2 .209
Superior is impartial 7.821 2 .020
Superior is a task master .161 2 .923
Superior makes working environment pleasant .390 2 .823
Superior considers others suggestions and opinions 2.500 2 .286
Superior maintains friendly relationship .249 2 .883
Superior cares for workers personal welfare 11.615 2 .003
a. Kruskal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable: Organizational Hierarchy

Interpretation
The Table 4.36 exhibits the relationship between superior and
subordinate based on organizational hierarchy. Chi-square test has been
applied. The results of the analysis indicate that the rankings of employees in
different organizational hierarchy with respect to superior subordinate
relationship in the organization are same for the following factors namely
approachability of superior, recognition of employee for achievement ,clarity
in explaining the task to be accomplished ,superiors follow an autocratic
approach, superiors act like a coach, superior helps in completing the work
 146

superior is a task master, superior makes working environment

pleasant, superior considers others suggestions and opinions and superior
maintains friendly relationship
There is significant difference in the rankings of employees in
different organizational hierarchy with respect to superior subordinate
relationship in the organization for the following factors at 10% significance
level for teamwork and coordination middle level employees have a better
ranking for this factor. Respecting coworkers, subordinates top level
employees have a better ranking for this factor. Superior is a good counselor
top level employees have a better ranking for this factor. Superior is impartial
shop floor level employees have a better ranking for this factor. Superior
cares for workers personal welfare shop floor level employees have a better
ranking for this factor.
 147

Table 4.37Table showing superior subordinate relationship based on

educational qualification
H 0: The ranking of employees in different educational background on various
factors with respect to superior subordinate relationship in the organization are
same.
H1:The ranking of employees in different educational background on various
factors with respect to superior subordinate relationship in the organization are
not same.

Test Statistics(a,b)

Chi-Square df Asymp. Sig.

Approachability of superior 6.943 3 .074
Recognition of employee for achievement 2.158 3 .540
Teamwork and coordination 21.090 3 .000
Respecting coworkers, subordinates 5.163 3 .160
Clarity in explaining the task to be accomplished 2.564 3 .464
Superiors follow an autocratic approach 1.350 3 .717
Superiors act like a coach .845 3 .839
Superior is a good counselor 1.581 3 .664
Superior helps in completing the work 1.983 3 .576
Superior is impartial 8.854 3 .031
Superior is a task master .210 3 .976
Superior makes working environment pleasant 1.609 3 .657
Superior considers others suggestions and opinions 5.187 3 .159
Superior maintains friendly relationship .768 3 .857
Superior cares for workers personal welfare 13.254 3 .004
a Kruskal Wallis Test
b Grouping Variable: Educational Background
 148

Interpretation

The respondents were grouped on educational qualification basis as

per Table 4.37 The rankings of employees in different educational background
on various factors with respect to superior subordinate relationship in the
organization are same for the following factors like recognition of employee
for achievement, respecting coworkers, subordinates, clarity in explaining the
task to be accomplished, superiors follow an autocratic approach ,superiors act
like a coach, superior is a good counsellor

Superior helps in completing the work, superior is a task master,

superior makes working environment pleasant, superior considers others
suggestions and opinions and

superior maintains friendly relationship and there is significant

difference in the rankings of employees with different educational background
on various factors with respect to superior subordinate relationship in the
organization for the following factor like approachability of superior , Team
work and coordination has been ranked better by employees with master
degree .Superior is impartial and superior cares for personal welfare has been
ranked better by employees with high school qualification.
 149

Table 4.38 Table showing superior subordinate relationship based on

Martial Status
H0:The ranking of male and female on various factors with respect to superior
subordinate relationship in the organization is same.
H1:The ranking of married and unmarried employees on various factors with
respect to superior subordinate relationship in the organization is not same.

Test Statisticsa

Asymp.
Mann- Wilcoxon Sig.
Whitney U W Z (2-tailed)
Approachability of superi or 21947.000 34827.00 -1.4 .158
Recogniti on of employee for achievement 22679.000 66635.00 -.747 .455
Teamwork and coordination 21745.000 34625.00 -1.6 .120
Respecting coworkers, subordinates 20564.500 33444.50 -2.4 .017
Cl arity in explaining the task to be accompli shed 23836.000 36716.00 -.003 .998
Superiors foll ow an autocratic approach 22962.500 35842.50 -.652 .515
Superiors act like a coach 21979.500 34859.50 -1.3 .185
Superior is a good couns elor 23800.500 36680.50 -.029 .977
Superior helps in completing the work 21994.000 66545.00 -1.4 .170
Superior is impartial 22066.500 66617.50 -1.2 .226
Superior is a task master 23278.500 35998.50 -.308 .758
Superior makes working environment pleas ant 21742.500 66293.50 -1.5 .146
Superior cons iders others suggesti ons and opinions 22548.500 67099.50 -.853 .394
Superior maintains friendly relationship 22452.500 67003.50 -1.0 .303
Superior cares for workers personal welfare 21461.000 66012.00 -1.8 .077
a. Grouping Variable: Marital status

Interpretation
The sample respondents were grouped based on marital status, as
per Table 4.38 the results found were that the rankings of married and
unmarried employees with respect to superior subordinate relationship in the
organization are same for the following factors like approachability of
superior, recognition of employee for achievement, teamwork and
coordination, clarity in explaining the task to be accomplished, superiors
follow an autocratic approach, superior is a good counselor Superiors act like
a coach, superior helps in completing the work, superior is impartial Superior
 150

is a task master, superior considers others suggestions and opinions, superior

maintains friendly relationship and superior makes working environment
pleasant.
There is significant difference in the rankings of married and
unmarried employees on various factors with respect to superior subordinate
relationship in the organization for the following factors at 10% significant
level where Respecting coworkers, subordinates married employees have
given better ranking by married employees and superior cares for workers
personal welfare has been ranked better by unmarried employees.