Measuring the job satisfaction

for Medical representative.

Presented To:-Prof. Nirav Halwadiya

Presented By:- Sanket Kanabar

Dhaval sathvara
Harshal chaudhary
Bhavik Virdiya
Patel Tanha
Korat vijay
Indian pharmaceutical industry:-

Ø The Indian pharmaceutical industry traces its roots to the 1903

formation of Bengal Chemical and Pharmaceutical Works in
Calcutta.
Ø The government took its first concrete steps toward self-
reliance in pharmaceuticals with the establishment of
Hindustan Antibiotics Ltd. (HAL) in 1954 and Indian Drugs
and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (IDPL) in 1961.
Ø The 1970 Patent Act:- recognizing patents on processes but not
patents on products.
Ø In 2005 India has agreed to enforce product patents on drugs.
Ø India currently represents just U.S. $6 billion of the $550
billion global pharmaceutical industry.
Ø The Indian sector represents just 8 percent of the global
industry total by volume, putting it in fourth place
worldwide, it accounts for 13 percent by value.

Ø
Th e   Le a d in g   Ph a rm a c e u t ic a l 
Co m p a n ie s   w it h in   In d ia : ­
 1. Ranbaxy Laboratories
 2. Cipla
 3. Dr Reddy's Laboratories
 4. Sun Pharmaceuticals
 5. Nicholas Piramal
 6. Zydus Cadila
 7. Biocon
 8. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals
 9. Wockhardt Ltd
 10. Orchid Chemicals



who is medical 
representative?
JOB DESCRIPTION OF MEDICAL REPRESENTATIVE:-

 Medical sales representatives are a key link between medical and

pharmaceutical companies and healthcare professionals.
 They work strategically to increase the awareness and use of a
company’s pharmaceutical and medical products.
 They work as a intermediate between the pharmaceutical companies.
 They are the major source of pharma market information.
 They provides their companies to important tool to become
competitive.
 They spends hours in waiting area to be listen from doctors for one
minute.
 Developing strategies for increasing opportunities to meet and talk
to contacts in the medical and healthcare sector.



CONTINUE:-
 Organizing conferences for doctors and other medical staff.
 Building and maintaining positive working relationships with medical
staff and supporting administration staff e.g. Receptionists.
 Managing budgets (for catering, outside speakers, conferences,
hospitality, etc).
 Keeping detailed records of all contacts and reaching (and if possible
exceeding) annual sales targets.
 Regularly attending company meetings, technical data presentations
and briefings.
 Keeping up with the latest clinical data supplied by the company and
interpreting, presenting and discussing this data with health
professionals during presentations.
 Monitoring competitor activity and competitors' products.
                JOB 
S ATISFACTION
MEDICAL REPRESENTATIVE JOB
SATISFACTION:-
 Maslow’s hierarchy of needs:-

CONTINUE:-
 Alderfer's erg theory:-
CONTINUE:-

 Hertzberg:-
Job Satisfaction
factors:- 
 Job Satisfaction
 Job outcomes
 Job performance
 Turnover
 Absenteeism
 Organizational Commitment
 Job Involvement

Sample design

 Target population: All the medical

representative working in pharmaceutical.
 Sample size: 50.
 Sample element: individual medical
representative.
 Extent: AHMEDABAD.
 Time: 2010.
 Sampling frame: not available.
 Sampling technique: non probability sampling
technique.(convenient sampling technique).
 Replacement or without replacement: without
replacement sampling method.


RESEARCH DESIGN

 Exploratory research
 Secondary data
 Qualitative data

 Conclusive research
 Descriptive research
 Cross sectional design
 Single cross sectional design



Survey methods

 Telephone interviewing
 Personal interviewing
 Mail interviewing

Sampling & scaling
Techniques
 Non-probability sampling
 Convenient sampling

 Scaling technique

Work with other company before joining the current organization
Their satisfaction with their company
Work in a team
No.  of time s the ir manag e r assist the m while  visit 
to the  doctors
o.  of doctors visit in a 
onth
e ir satisfaction with the ir 
adquarte r
Satisfaction re late d to the ir imme diate  
manag e r
 ir state me nt for the ir imme diate  
nag e r
isfaction with the ir wag e s & work 
d
Statement to their company
Qualification
Employe e ’ s thinking  about more  e arning  at 
same  de sig nation in othe r company
Ove rall job satisfaction today compare  to 
be g inning
satisfaction * work_type Crosstabulation

Count

work_type Total

yes no

satisfaction much more satisfied 1 0 1

some what more satisfied 21 2 23

same level of satisfaction 13 6 19

some what less satisfied 1 4 5

much less satisfied 0 2 2

Total 36 14 50
Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 16.610a 4 .002

Likelihood Ratio 17.002 4 .002

Linear-by-Linear Association 15.307 1 .000

N of Valid Cases 50

a. 6 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .28.
Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

satisfaction * work_type Crosstabulation

Count
satisfaction
Total same less
some
much moresatisfied
level
what of
more
less
satisfied
satisfaction
satisfied
satisfied 36 work_type 14
yes
21
13
1
0 no
0
6
4
2 Total
1
23
19
5
2
50
Chi-Square
Pearson
Likelihood
Linear-by-Linear
N
a. of
6 cells
ValidChi-Square
(60.0%)
Cases
Ratio
Tests
Association
have expected 50
Value
17.002
15.307 a
count less
16.610 than
df 5. The minimum
4
1 Asymp.
.002
.000 expected
Sig. (2-
Nominal by Nominal count is .28. Phi sided) .576 .002

Cramer's V .576 .002

Contingency Coefficient .499 .002

N of Valid Cases 50
VISIT_OF_MANAGERS * SATISFACTION Crosstabulation

Count

SATISFACTION Total

MUCH MORE SOME WHAT MORE N SOME WHAT LESS MUCH LESS
SATISFIED SATISFIED SATISFIED SATISFIED

VISIT_OF_MANAGERS ONE TIME 1 2 0 0 0 3

2-5 TIMES 0 12 6 1 0 19

5-8 TIMES 0 9 10 2 1 22

MORE THAN 8 TIMES 0 0 3 2 1 6

Total 1 23 19 5 2 50
Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 29.255a 12 .004

Likelihood Ratio 21.877 12 .039

Linear-by-Linear Association 13.505 1 .000

N of Valid Cases 50

a. 16 cells (80.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .06.
Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Phi .765 .004

Cramer's V .442 .004

Contingency Coefficient .608 .004

N of Valid Cases 50
Conclusion &Interpretation:-
 [1] When we conduct the study we come to know
that 74% of the field person are working as a
MR in our survey.
 [2] More than 30% of participant had work with
any other company before joining the current.
And most of them have work for 2-5 years.
 [3] Around 50% are remain neutral for their
company satisfaction. While 35% somewhat
more satisfy.
 [4] Most of our participant are work in a team
rather than alone.
 [5] More than 40% are assisted by their manager
5-8 times in a month.
 [6] More than 60% are visit 101-150 doctors in a
month.
 [7] Participant who like their current head-
quarter are not suggesting to change and the
reason for their satisfaction is their
contingency. Those who want to change their
head-quarter are thinking that they will grow
 [8] Their satisfaction with their
immediate manager somewhat
more satisfied and they are thinking
their manager is fair to them.
 [9] Their satisfaction with their wages
and workload is somewhat more
satisfied but the interesting result
is seen in the option/pension plan
and here they are somewhat
dissatisfied.
 [10] They like to remain more neutral
on the question related to their
company.
 [11] Most of the participant are
pharmacy graduate.
 [12] Most of them are somewhat more
satisfied with their job.
 [13]On the question of suggestion
related to enhance their
satisfaction most of them are ask to
increase their salary and wages.
Interpretation
 After the completion of research work
we come to know many different
things
 MR’s job satisfaction is affected
by their colleague. They are more
satisfied when they are in group
then alone because in group they
think that their work is decreased.
And so they are more satisfied in
group.
 Their satisfaction is also
affected by the number of visit
their manager take to them and it
affect inversely. As the number of
visit increase the satisfaction is
decrease. In this case in may be
like that they fill inconvenient when
their manager come and suggest
 If we compare their PAY scale then
we come to know that they are
somewhat satisfied with the
salary and incentive but they
still asking to increase it to
increase their satisfaction.
 The interesting point in their
satisfaction is also that their
headquarters. When they are
satisfied the reason is their
convenience but they want to
change their headquarters when
they think that their growth may
be higher at other place and at
that time they want to change
the headquarters.
