2. Journal of Management Research and Development (JMRD), ISSN 2248 – 937X (Print) ISSN 2248 –
9390(Online), Volume 1, Number 1, January - April (2011)
IMPROVEMENT ON MORALE
Whenever something is found to be wrong with the workers, it is obvious that
there must be some cause of this situation. It may be the policies or practices of the
company are defective or that if executives or at fault, or the views of those morale is
low do not agree with those of the company or of its executives. Since morale is
determined largely by workers participation and attitude, the management should
work upon the conditions that define these perceptions. For e.g. managers can
concentrate on supervisory styles, company policies, working conditions and other
factors external to and out of the control of the work to see that such factors are
employees oriented. Leadership styles that supports the worker & encourage him may
be applied.
Table showing the relationship between income and years of service in the
organization:
H0: There is no relationship between employee perception on income and years
of service in the organization.
H1: There is relationship between employee perception on income and years of
service in the organization.
Years of Income Adequate Moderate Highly Inadequate
service highly moderate
adequate
<1 year 10 1 1 1 2
1-5 years 15 2 2 1 6
5-10 years 5 1 5 9 1
10-20 years 4 1 3 12 2
>20 years 3 2 2 2 7
Total 37 7 13 25 17
Mean( ) 7.4 1.4 2.6 5 3.6
=
= =4
SUM OF SQUARES BETWEEN SAMPLES
∑n ( - ) 2
= 5(7.4-4)2+5(1.4-4)2+5(2.6-4)2+5(5.2-4)2+5(3.4- 4)2
= 57.8+33.8+9.8+7.2+1.8
= 110.4
Degrees of freedom (v) = (5-1) =4.
SUM OF SQUARES WITHIN SAMPLE: Xi1- ) 2
Highly Adequate: = (10-7.4) + (15-7.4) + (5-7.4) + (4- 7.4 )2+ (3-7.4)2
2 2 2
= 101.2
Adequate: = (1-1.4)2 + (2-1.4)2 + (1-1.4)2+(1-1.4)2 +(2-1.4)2
= 4.4
15
3. Journal of Management Research and Development (JMRD), ISSN 2248 – 937X (Print) ISSN 2248 –
9390(Online), Volume 1, Number 1, January - April (2011)
Moderate: = (1-2.6)2+ (2-2.6)2+ (5-2.6)2+ (3-2.6)2+ (2-2.6)2
=11.6
Highly moderate: = (1-5)2+ (1-5)2+ (9-5)2+ (12-5)2+ (3-5)2
=101.
Inadequate: = (2-3.6)2+ (6-3.6)2+ (1-3.6)2+ (2-3.6)2+ (7-3.6)2
= 29.2.
SUM OF SQUARES WITHIN SAMPLE: TOTAL=247.4
Degrees of freedom=N-C= (5*5-5)
= 20.
ANNOVA TABLE
Sum of Degrees of freedom Mean Square F ratio
squares
Source of variance
Between income and
years of service 110.4 4 27.6
Within income
247.4 20 F=27.6/14
14.09 .09
=1.96
F tab (4, 20) = 4.43
F cal =1.96.
F cal <F tab
Accept H0.
Inference
From the above table it is inferred that the respondents feel that is no
relationship between income and years of service in the organization.
Chart showing the emphasis of teamwork in the organisation:
Findings:
From the above table it is found that, 80% of respondents emphasized
on teamwork and 20% of respondents didn’t emphasized on teamwork.
Inference:
From the above chart it is inferred that most of the respondents feel that
teamwork is emphasized in the organisation
16
4. Journal of Management Research and Development (JMRD), ISSN 2248 – 937X (Print) ISSN 2248 –
9390(Online), Volume 1, Number 1, January - April (2011)
Table showing the rank of attributes related to work environment:
Attributes R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Achievement 19 10 20 12 14 25
Loyalty 10 9 3 37 31 16
Recognition 11 10 26 14 27 12
Responsibility 25 27 14 13 11 10
Economic 9 7 15 13 17 39
security
Self respect 11 37 8 10 12 22
Total of respondents =100
Table showing the weighted average of various attributes:
Attributes Weighted average Rank
Achievement 3.33 4
Loyalty 3 6
Recognition 3.28 5
Responsibility 3.99 1
Economic security 3.61 2
Self respect 3.59 3
WEIDHTED MEAN CALCULATION
For Achievement:
= 19×6+10×5+20×4+12×3+14×2+25×1
= 333
= 333/100
= 3.33
Inference
From the above table it is inferred that the respondents prefer rank 1 to
Responsibility, rank 2 to economic security, rank 3 to self respect, rank 4 to
achievement, rank 5 to recognition, and rank 6 to loyalty.
Table showing the association between attitude towards work environment and
satisfactory level in the organisation
H0: There is no association between attitude towards work environment and
satisfactory level
H1: There is association between attitude towards work environment and
satisfactory level
17
5. Journal of Management Research and Development (JMRD), ISSN 2248 – 937X (Print) ISSN 2248 –
9390(Online), Volume 1, Number 1, January - April (2011)
Attitude Highly Satisfied Neither Highly Dissatisfied Total
toward work satisfied satisfied dissatisfied
environment nor
dissatisfied
Salary 10 5 7 1 0 23
Career growth 3 4 7 2 2 18
opportunity
Grievance 1 5 5 1 1 13
handling
Time 2 3 5 0 1 11
management
R&R system 2 2 5 1 1 11
Safety 3 6 2 0 1 12
Training 2 5 4 0 1 12
&Development
Expected Values:
Attitude Highly Satisfied Neither Highly Dissatisfied
toward work satisfied satisfied dissatisfied
environment nor
dissatisfied
Salary 2.99 4.33 5.06 0.722 1.011
Career growth 4.14 6 7 1 1.44
opportunity
Grievance 2.99 4.33 5.06 0.722 1.011
handling
Time 2.53 3.67 4.278 0.611 0.856
management
R&R system 2.53 3.67 4.278 0.611 0.856
Safety 5.76 4 4.667 0.556 0.933
Training 2.76 4 4.667 0.556 0.933
&Development
18
6. Journal of Management Research and Development (JMRD), ISSN 2248 – 937X (Print) ISSN 2248 –
9390(Online), Volume 1, Number 1, January - April (2011)
Calculation Part
X2 =
Calculated value for X2=28.0396.
Degree of freedom = (R-1)(C-1)=(7-1)(5-1)
=24
X2 tab at 24 d.f = 36.415
X2 cal > X2 tab
Accept H0
Findings:
From the above table it is found that most of the respondents consider salary as a
major factor in the organization.
Inference:
From the above table it is cleared that, there is no association between attitude toward
work environment and satisfactory level in the organisation.
FINDINGS
Most of the respondents feel that their income is highly adequate.
It is found that the respondents feel that achievement is considered as a major
factor for their work environment.
It is found that 67% of respondents are not aware of HR practises followed in
the organisation.
Most of the respondents prefer opportunity for growth as a major factor for
career development.
It is found that 65% of respondents to superior, 27% to external
consultants,5% to peers and 3% to subordinates for an appraisal system.
It is found that most of the respondents prefer salary as a major factor for
satisfactory level in the organisation.
It is clear that training is required for respondents according to the need.
It is found that 57% of respondents didn’t accepted that HR practises are
good enough to address all the grievance of employees.
It is found that 80% of respondents agreed that teamwork is emphasized in the
organisation.
SUGGESTIONS
Try to make an approachable environment to subordinates so that when come
with a problem it can be solved.
Define your expectation clearly so that ambiguity can be avoided.
Understand the individual profile and delegate.
Ensure completion of all activities of a process.
Try to avoid ego problems.
Always develop a professional way of working.
Talk to superior if difficult to access.
19
7. Journal of Management Research and Development (JMRD), ISSN 2248 – 937X (Print) ISSN 2248 –
9390(Online), Volume 1, Number 1, January - April (2011)
Continuously improve your knowledge.
Avoid negative inner critic voice.
Apply whether learnt then only it gives value addition to your work.
Otherwise it will be forgotten after few days.
Understand the superior’s priority and act.
CONCLUSION
The paper provides the details about the employee’s satisfaction level
towards the facilities, rewards and recognition, working environment, appreciation
from their superior and the motivation from the top management. The organization
should provide comfortable working condition so that employee gives productivity.
REFERENCES
1. Stephen Taylor, The Employee Retention Handbook, 2008, Jaico Publishing
House.
2. George F.Dreher, Thomas W.Dougherty, Human Resource Strategy 2005,
Tata McGraw – Hili publishing company limited, New Delhi.
3. Rodger w. Griffeth / Peter W. Hom, Retaining Valued Employees, 2001, Sage
publications.
4. Derek Torrington, Laura Hall & Stephen Taylor, Human Resource
Management 2002, Pearson Education Limited, England.
5. Paul Turner, HR forecasting and Planning, 2005, Jaico Publishing house,
Mumbai.
6. Michael Armstrong, A Handbook of Human Resource Management, 2006,
Kogan Page, United Kingdom.
7. Barbara A. Glanz, Handle with CARE – Motivating and Retaining your
Employees
ARTICLES
1. Managing talent in uncertain times, Management Today, March 2009.
2. Wiki at work, Management Today, December 2007.
3. Learn from successive generations, The Human Factor, September 2009,
volume 1 issue 10.
4. Each one Teach one, Human Capital, Vol.13 No.7, December 2009.
5. Right training and right sizing for survival, HRD newsletter, Vol: 24, issue:
12, March 2009.
20