Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A Study On Quality of Worklife of An
A Study On Quality of Worklife of An
A PROJECT REPORT
Submitted by
HEMAVATHY.L.D.
OF
Of
AUGUST 2010
DECLARATION:
Place:
Date: Signature
SRINIVASA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
PARIVAKKAM, POONAMALLEE, CHENNAI-600 056.
BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE
Certified further, that to the best of my knowledge the work reported herein
does not form part of any other project or dissertation on the earlier occasion
on this or any other candidate.
I thank for his grace that sustained to complete this project work successfully.
I own the pride to thank Mr. Pavan Kumar Manager, Human Resources and
Services Department and Mr. Bhakyaraj, Personnel officer for giving me an opportunity
to undertake this project in THE KCP Engineering Unit. I am thankful for their
motivation support for having helped me to complete the project.
Finally, I thank my family and friends for their valuable support throughout my
project.
3. Research methodology
3.1 Meaning 18
3.2 Research design 19
3.3 Data collection 20
3.4 Sampling design 21
3.5 Data analysis tools 23
5. Findings 59-60
6. Suggestions 61
7. Conclusion 62
8. Bibliography 63
9. Annexure
LIST OF TABLES
6. CHI-SQUARE
4.6.1 Table showing the relationship between experiences of
respondents and work stress in the organisation:
Observed frequency 33
4.6.2 Expected frequency 34
4.6.3 Calculation of Chi-square 34-35
The Primary objective of the project is to analyze the quality of work life of
employees.
The study will give a detailed note about the HR&S department in the organization.
There is specific statistical tool which I used to analyze the data that have been collected.
The study will enable the organization and provide effective and beneficial
measures for the development of the organization.
The study is helpful of gaining the practical knowledge about the organization.
CHAPTER-1
1.1 INTRODUCTION :
An organization is made of four resources namely, Men, Material, Money,
Machinery. The most significant in an organization are the people (men). Human resources
are heterogeneous in the sense, that they differ in personality, perception, emotions, values,
attributes, motives and modes of thoughts. Their behavior to stimuli is often inconsistent
and unpredictable.
“Hackman and Suttle” describes a Quality of Work Life from varied viewpoints.
Such views are
• From the professional view point, it refers to the industrial democracy and
increased workers participation in a corporate decision making.
DEFINITION OF QWL:
MEANING OF QWL:
Quality of Work life is first to identify the employees important needs, their
experience in work environment and satisfy them. Positive result is a Win-Win QWL has
supported number of previous studies, includes reduced absenteeism, lower turnover and
improved job satisfaction. Quality of Work Life balanced and satisfaction of the
organization’s objectives in an effective manner.
Hydel
Cement power
division division
THE
KCP
KCP
KCP technology
Vietnam Limited
industries
KCP
biotech
limited
2
KCP GROUP DIVISIONS
• FIVE CAIL:
Today the fives cail group has come to literally mean engineering
excellence in the sugar, cement and mineral industries worldwide. Its ISO certified
Sugar Division specifically has been a long standing supplier of equipment and
3
technology to the world sugar industry. Right from design of new equipment, development
of process, automation of plants and modernization or expansion of existing sugar
factories. Fives cail’s expertise covers every conceivable need of the industry
4
• KCP HEAVY ENGINEERING:
KCP has a marked presence in the supply of key machinery to the core
sector industries. They are:
• Casting.
• Machining.
• Fabrication.
5
1.3 COMPANY PROFILE:
• The KCP Limited was started in 1941. The founder of The KCP Limited was
“Sri.V.Ramakrishna”.
• The chairman and managing director is Dr.V.L.Dutt and joint managing director is
Mrs. V.L. Indira Dutt.
• Under their leadership, KCP have grown from strength to strength into a Rs. 150
crore ($50 million) company.
MAJOR CUSTOMERS:
The major customers of The KCP Limited are L&T, ABB, Gujarat Ambuja Cement
Limited (GACL), Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL), ALSTOM, Defense
Research and Development Laboratories (DRDL), Vizag Steel Plant, Essar Steel Plant
etc.
6
AWARD:
• ISO 9001:2008.
• Now preparing records and documents, for getting an approval from ISO
18001.
The various departments at the KCP are 19 in number. The number of staff
members at KCP is around 250 and the total numbers of workers are over 750. The
various departments at KCP are:
• Design.
• Marketing.
• Procurement.
• Industrial Engineering.
• Management System.
• Finance.
• Computer Services.
7
• Foundry.
• Fabrication.
• Machine shop.
• Quality services.
• Stores.
• Vendor development.
• Logistics.
8
• The organization believes that by providing a good Quality of Work Life, the
employees feel more balanced.
9
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES:
SECONDARY OBJECTIVES:
• To study the present level of satisfaction among the workers and staff.
• To find the relationship between the variables influencing quality of work life.
The scope of this study is to find the Quality of Work Life satisfaction level in the
working environment of the employees and to increase the personnel needs.
12
• Even though the survey was conducted among the employees of the KCP Limited,
it may not reflect the real opinion of the employees.
• Interaction with the employees was very limited because of their busy work
schedule.
• The samples may give opinion differently at different times because of their
psychological temperament. This will affect the survey.
13
CHAPTER-2
REVIEW OF LITERARURE:
Quality of Working Life is a term that had been used to describe the broader job-
related experience an individual has.
Whilst there has, for many years, been much research into job satisfaction (1), and,
more recently, an interest has arisen into the broader concepts of stress and subjective well-
being (2), the precise nature of the relationship between these concepts has still been little
explored. Stress at work is often considered in isolation, wherein it is assessed on the basis
that attention to an individual’s stress management skills or the sources of stress will prove
to provide a good enough basis for effective intervention. Alternatively, job satisfaction
may be assessed, so that action can be taken which will enhance an individual’s
performance. Somewhere in all this, there is often an awareness of the greater context,
whereupon the home-work context is considered, for example, and other factors, such as an
individual’s personal characteristics, and the broader economic or cultural climate, might
be seen as relevant. In this context, subjective well-being is seen as drawing upon both
work and non-work aspects of life.
Quality of working life has been differentiated from the broader concept of Quality
of work life. To some degree, this may be overly simplistic, as Elizur and Shye, (1990) (3)
concluded that quality of work performance is affected by Quality of Life as well as
Quality of working life. However, it will be argued here that the specific attention to work-
related aspects of quality of life is valid.
14
Whilst Quality of Life has been more widely studied (4), Quality of working life,
remains relatively unexplored and unexplained. A review of the literature reveals relatively
little on quality of working life. Where quality of working life has been explored, writers
differ in their views on its’ core constituents.
It is argued that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts as regards Quality of
working Life, and, therefore, the failure to attend to the bigger picture may lead to the
failure of interventions which tackle only one aspect. A clearer understanding of the inter-
relationship of the various facets of quality of working life offers the opportunity for
improved analysis of cause and effect in the workplace.
This consideration of Quality of working Life as the greater context for various
factors in the workplace, such as job satisfaction and stress, may offer opportunity for more
cost-effective interventions in the workplace. The effective targeting of stress reduction, for
example, may otherwise prove a hopeless task for employers pressured to take action to
meet governmental requirements.
Definition:
Mirvis and Lawler (1984)(8) suggested that Quality of working life was associated
with satisfaction with wages, hours and working conditions, describing the “basic elements
of a good quality of work life” as; safe work environment, equitable wages, equal
employment opportunities and opportunities for advancement.
Measurement:
There are few recognised measures of quality of working life, and of those that
exist few have evidence of validity and reliability, that is, there is a very limited literature
based on peer reviewed evaluations of available assessments. A recent statistical analysis
15
of a new measure, the Work-Related Quality of Life scale (WRQoL)(18), indicates that this
assessment device should prove to be a useful instrument, although further evaluation
would be useful. The WRQoWLS measure uses 6 core factors to explain most of the
variation in an individuals quality of working life: Job and Career Satisfaction; Working
Conditions; General Well-Being; Home-Work Interface; Stress at Work and Control at
Work.
The Job & Career Satisfaction Job and Career satisfaction (JCS)scale of the Work-
Related Quality of Life scale (WRQoL) is said to reflect an employee’s feelings about, or
evaluation of, their satisfaction or contentment with their job and career and the training
they receive to do it. Within the WRQoL measure, JCS is reflected by questions asking
how satisfied people feel about their work. It has been proposed that this Positive Job
Satisfaction factor is influenced by various issues including clarity of goals and role
ambiguity, appraisal, recognition and reward, personal development career benefits and
enhancement and training needs.
The General well-being (GWB) scale of the Work-Related Quality of Life scale
(WRQoL) (18) aims to assess the extent to which an individual feels good or content in
themselves, in a way which may be independent of their work situation. It is suggested that
general well-being both influences, and is influenced by work. Mental health problems,
predominantly depression and anxiety disorders, are common, and may have a major
impact on the general well-being of the population. The WRQoL GWB factor assesses
issues of mood, depression and anxiety, life satisfaction, general quality of life, optimism
and happiness.
The WRQoL Stress at Work sub-scale (SAW) reflects the extent to which an
individual perceives they have excessive pressures, and feel stressed at work. The WRQoL
SAW factor is assessed through items dealing with demand and perception of stress and
actual demand overload. Whilst it is possible to be pressured at work and not be stressed at
work, in general, high stress is associated with high pressure.
16
The Control at Work (CAW) subscale of the WRQoL scale addresses how much
employees feel they can control their work through the freedom to express their opinions
and being involved in decisions at work. Perceived control at work as measured by the
Work-Related Quality of Life scale (WRQoL)(18)is recognized as a central concept in the
understanding of relationships between stressful experiences, behaviour and health. Control
at work, within the theoretical model underpinning the WRQoL, is influenced by issues of
communication at work, decision making and decision control.
The WRQoL Home-Work Interface scale (HWI) measures the extent to which an
employer is perceived to support the family and home life of employees. This factor
explores the interrelationship between home and work life domains. Issues that appear to
influence employee HWI include adequate facilities at work, flexible working hours and
the understanding of managers.
The Working Conditions scale of the WRQoL assesses the extent to which the
employee is satisfied with the fundamental resources, working conditions and security
necessary to do their job effectively. Physical working conditions influence employee
health and safety and thus employee Quality of working life. This scale also taps into
satisfaction with the resources provided to help people do their jobs.
17
CHAPTER-3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
3.1 MEANING:
18
3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN:
• DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH:
19
3.3 DATA COLLECTION:
• PRIMARY DATA:
The primary data are those, which are collected a fresh and for the first time
and thus happen to be original in character.
• SECONDARY DATA:
The secondary data constitute the chief material on the basis of which
statistical work is carried out. Secondary data was collected from various sources as
books and websites.
• SAMPLE UNIT:
• SAMPLING SIZE:
• SAMPLING TECHNIQUES:
Sampling is done to collect samples. The sampling techniques are used for
large numbers. The sampling technique used in this study is Convenience Sampling
under non-probability sampling.
The various statistical techniques such as Bar charts have been employed
in making the results of the study more pictorial and easy to understand. The
following statistical tools were applied in order to validate the result of the study.
• PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS.
• CHI-SQUARE TEST.
• ANOVA.
• PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS:
Percentage method is used to find out the number of respondents opted for
one particular option. It is used to make comparison between two or more set of data
and to describes the relations between variables and, is also used to compare the
relative term.
The chi-square test is one of the simplest and most widely used non-
parametric tests in statistic works. The symbols Ψ2 is a Greek letter chi. The Ψ2 test
was first used by Karl-Pearson, the quantity Ψ2 describes the magnitude of the
discrepancy between theory and observation.
23
• ANOVA:
ANALYTICAL TOOLS:
Rating scale is used for the questionnaires and given to the employees. The Bar
charts are drawn for an easy observing.
24
CHAPTER-4
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION:
Data analysis and interpretation refers to the tasks of drawing inferences from
the collected facts after an analytical and experimental study. Interpretation is the
device through which the factor explains what have been observed by researcher in
the course of the study. Interpretation is essential for a simple reason that the
usefulness and utility of research finding lie in proper interpretation.
This chapter deals with the analysis and interpretation of the sample, data
collected from questionnaires, which were issued, to a sample of 150 employees.
The analysis is done based on the sample data, which has been reflected in
various tables, which helps to draw conclusions whether the measures followed by
the organization to improve the Quality of Work Life of an Employees, are effective.
25
TABLE 4.1
Foundry 33 22
Fabrication 36 24
Machine shop 51 34
Quality Services 30 20
CHART 4.1
PERCENTAGE
40
34
35
30
24
25 22
20
20 PERCENTAGE
15
10
5
0
Foundry Fabrication Machine shop Quality Services
INFERENCE:
Is the inference from the above statistic analysis that 34% of the respondents are
workers, employed in the Machine Shop which is the highest percentage. 20% of the
respondents are workers, employed in Fabrication Department.
27
TABLE 4.2
Super Skilled 24 16
Skilled-I 42 28
Skilled-II 32 21.3
Semi-Skilled 24 16
INFERENCE:
It is inferred from the above statistic analysis that 28% of the respondents come
under the Skilled-I. 16% of the respondents come under the Super Skilled and Semi-Skilled
designation.
28
Table showing Experience wise distribution of Respondents
TABLE 4.3
EXPERIENCE RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE
<5years 36 24
5-10years 42 28
11-15years 42 28
>20years 30 20
TOTAL 150 100
30
28 28
25 24
20 20
15
10
5
0 0 0 0
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
INFERENCE:
It is inferred the above statistic analysis that 28% of the respondents are worked up
to 5-10 years and 11-15 years of experience. 24% of the respondents are worked less than 5
years of experiences.
29
Table showing Income Wise distribution of respondents
TABLE 4.4
INCOME RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE
5,000-10,000 30 20
11,000-15,000 40 26.7
16,000-20,000 38 25.3
>20,000 42 28
TOTAL 150 100
PERCENTAGE
PERCENTAGE
30 28
26.7 25.3
25
20
20
15
10
5
0
5,000- 11,000- 16,000- >20,000
10,000 15,000 20,000
INFERENCE:
It is inferred from the above statistic analysis that 28% of the respondents are
getting income more than 20,000. 20% of respondents are getting income up to 5,000-
10,000.
30
Table showing Influences of Quality of work life on productivity and
Respondents
TABLE 4.5
INFLUENCES OF
QUALITY OF WORK RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE
LIFE
Agree 42 28
Strongly agree 36 24
Disagree 37 24.7
Strongly disagree 35 23.3
TOTAL 150 100
30 28
24 24.7 23.3
25
20
15
10
5
0
INFERENCE:
It is inferred from the above statistic analysis that 28% of the respondents are
affected on quality of work life is agreed. 23.33% of the respondents are strongly disagreed
with their QWL affected the productivity.
31
CHI-SQUARE TEST
32
Table showing the relationship between Experience of respondents and
Work stress in the organisation
Table 4.6.1
OBSERVED FREQUENCY:
<5years 8 10 12 12 42
5-10 years 14 11 7 9 41
11-20 years 8 11 11 8 38
>20 years 10 6 6 7 29
TOTAL 40 38 36 36 150
33
Table 4.6.2
EXPECTED FREQUENCY:
TOTAL 40 38 36 36 150
Table 4.6.3
CALCULATION OF CHI-SQUARE:
O E (O-E)2 (O-E)2/E
TOTAL 6.23
35
= (4-1) (4-1)
= 9.
Ψ²0.05 = 16.919.
RESULT:
The calculated Ψ² value is 6.23 is less than the table value is 16.919
.·. H0 is accepted.
INFERENCE:
36
AIM:
To test whether there is a significance difference in their performance in the
organisation.
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS:
There is a significant difference of their performance in the organisation.
37
Table showing the difference of their performance in the organisation:
TABLE 4.7.1
TOTAL 56 54 26 14 150
38
N=16
T= ∑Xi1+…..+∑Xin
= 56+54+26+14
T = 150
C = T²/N
= 150/16
C = 1406.25
Calculation of Total Sum of Squares (SST):
SST = ∑∑Xij – C
(4²+2²+4²+4²)] – 1406.25
= (786+734+190+52) – 1406.25
SST = 355.75
39
Calculation of Sum of Squares Between Samples (SSB):
SSB = ∑ (∑Xij) ² - C
Nij
SSB = 324.75
= 355.75 – 324.75
SSW = 31.00
40
Table 4.7.2
ANOVA TABLE:
= 108.25 = 41.91
N-C = 16-4 MSW = SSW/N-C
Within SSW = 31.00
samples = 12 = 31.00/3
= 2.583
Level of Significance = 1%
α = 0.01
41
Degree of freedom = V1 = 3; V2 = 12
= F0.01 (12, 3)
Fα = 5.95
Decision:
41.91>5.95
.·. H0 is rejected.
RESULT:
.·. H1 is accepted.
INFERENCE:
42
TWO WAY CLASSIFICATIONS:
To test whether there is a relationship between the Age of respondents and Working
shifts.
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS:
There is a significant relationship between the Age of respondents and Working
shifts in the organisation
43
Table showing the Relationship between the Age of respondents and
Working Shifts in the organisation:
TABLE 4.8.1
25-35 8 9 10 8 35
36-45 10 8 13 9 40
46-50 9 11 11 11 42
>50 7 5 11 10 33
TOTAL 34 33 45 38 150
= (150)²/16
= 1406.25
44
Calculation of Total Sum of Squares: (SST):
SST = ∑∑xij²- C
1406.25
= [294+291+511+366] – 1406.25
SST= 55.75
SSC = ∑ (∑Xi) ²
j -- C
nj
= [(34)²/4 + (33)²/4 + (45)²/4 + (38)²/4] – 1406.25
= 1428.5 – 1406.25
SSC = 22.25
45
Calculation of Sum of Square Between Rows: (SSR):
= [306.25+400+441+272.25] – 1406.25
= 1419.5 – 1406.25
SSR = 13.25
SSE = 20.25
46
Table 4.8.2
ANOVA TABLE:
Between
column C-1 = 4-1 MSC = SSC/C-1 F = MSC/MSE
(working shifts SSC = 22.25
in the =3 = 22.25/3 = 7.42/0.25
organisation)
= 7.42 = 29.68
=9 = 0.35
47
α = 0.05
= 3; 9
= F0.01 (9, 3)
Fα = 3.86
|F| = 29.68. The table value of F for 3, 9 Degree of Freedom at 5% level of significance
is 3.86
Decision:
.·. H0 is rejected.
48
RESULT:
.·. H1 is accepted.
INFERENCE:
Level of significant = α = 5%
= 0.05
= 3; 9
|F| = 17.68. The table value of F for 3, 9 Degree of Freedom at 5% Level of significant
is 3.86
49
Decision:
.·. H0 is rejected.
RESULT:
.·. H1 is accepted.
INFERENCE:
Hence, there is a relationship between the age of respondents and working shifts
in the organisation.
50
AIM:
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
51
Table showing the relationship between the Experiences of respondents
and Training program conducted by the organisation
TABLE 4.9.1
<5years 15 14 8 4 41
5-10 years 14 15 6 4 39
11-20 years 14 12 9 4 39
>20 years 13 13 3 2 29
TOTAL 56 54 26 14 150
Correction factor = C = T²/N
= (150)²/16
C= 1406.25
52
Calculation of Total Sum of Squares (SST):
SST = ∑∑Xij – C
1406.25
= (786+734+190+52) – 1406.25
= 1762 – 1406.25
SST = 355.75
SSR = ∑ (∑Xi) ²
j -C
nj
= [(41)²/4 + (39)²/4 + (39)²/4 + (31)²/4] – 1406.25
= (420.25+380.25+380.35+240.25) – 1406.25
= 1421 – 1406.25
SSR = 14.75
53
Calculation of Sum of Squares Between Column (SSC):
= (784+729+169+49) – 1406.25
= 1731 – 1406.25
SSC = 324.75
SSE = 16.25
54
Table 4.9.2
ANOVA TABLE:
Between
column C-1 = 4-1 MSC = SSC/C-1 F = MSC/MSE
(Training SSC = 324.75
program =3 = 324.75/3 = 108.25/1.81
conducted
by the = 108.25 = 59.81
organisation)
= 4.75 = 2.62
(C-1)(R-1) MSE = SSE/(C-1)(R-1)
=9 = 1.81
55
The level of significance = 5%
α = 0.05
= 3; 9
= F0.01 (9, 3)
Fα = 3.86
Significance is 3.86
Decision:
|F| = 59.81; |Fα| = 3.86
56
RESULT:
.·. H0 is rejected.
INFERENCE:
= 3; 9
= F0.01 (9, 3)
Fα = 3.86
|F| = 2.62. The table value of F for 3, 9 degree of freedom at 5% level of
Significance is 3.86
57
Decision:
RESULT:
.·. H0 is accepted.
INFERENCE:
CHAPTER-5
FINDINGS:
• Majority of the respondents (30.67%) from the age group of 36-46 years.
• The male population is nearly twice (84%) as that of female population.
• Most of the respondents form the Diploma qualification is 41%.
• 58% of the respondents from the 11-20 years of Experience.
• Most of the respondents are from the Income level is more than 15,000 is 48%.
• 49% of the respondents are strongly agreed with the peer groups are friendly and
cooperative.
• 56% of them agreed that, there is a mutual understanding between the departments.
• 53% of the workers are satisfied with their working condition.
• 39% of the workers are dissatisfied with their quality of work life will not affect
their family.
• 35% of them are strongly agreed with a mutual understanding between superior and
subordinates.
• Majority of respondents 24% of them disagreed with their work stress in the
organisation.
• 31.67% of the respondents are agreed with the suggestions considered by their
superior.
• 47.34% of them agreed with their comfortable with their working shifts.
• 62% of the respondents are agreed with the training program conducted by the
organisation.
• Strongly agreed (66%) of the respondents are the superior is adjustable with
subordinates.
• 36% of the respondents are agreed that there is a influences the productivity in
quality of work life.
59
• 57% of the respondents are agreed that the superior encourages them for a job done
well.
• 42% of the respondents of them strongly agreed that their level of skills &
knowledge is matching their experience.
• 53% of the respondents are agreed that, there colleagues guiding them during
working hours.
• 52% of them agreed that their role is well defined.
• 33% are the most of the respondents agreed that the organisation is following the
safety regulation.
• 55% of them strongly agreed with the reward policy provided by the organisation
while they perform well.
• 32% are the most of the respondents agreed that, they treat their work as a
challenge.
• 46% of them strongly agreed that, they are satisfied with their work.
• 42% of them gave suggestions regarding quality of work life.
60
CHAPTER-6
SUGESSTION:
• Still the should be improvement in the coordination between superior and subordinates.
• The mutual understanding between the workers and the staff should be increased.
• The job involvement of an employees is satisfied by them and also satisfied with there
wages.
61
CHAPTER-7
CONCLUSION:
The key factor in the success of extension organizations is improving their human
resources. This will help extension managers improve their human resource system. The
proper planning and implementation of the human resource system will result in overall
development of extension personnel. This will also enable extension organizations to adapt
to the rapid changes occurring in the extension environment of developing countries.
62
CHAPTER-8
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
BOOKS:
WEBSITES:
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality_of_working_life
• http://www.kcp.co.in/Html/heavy_engineering.html
• http://www.fao.org/docrep/w5830e/w5830e0g.html
63
CHAPTER-9
ANNEXURE
1. Name :
2. Employee No. :
3. Designation :
4. Department :
5. Age :
6. Gender :
7. Qualification :
8. Experience :
9. Monthly income :
18. Do the training program conducted by the organization helped you to perform the
work effectively?
22. The level of your skill & knowledge is matching your experience?