A STUDY ON EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT AT SALCOMP

MANUFACTURING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Submitted in the partial fulfillment of the requirements

For the award of the degree in

MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION INTERNSHIP REPORT

By
HEMA KUMAR R (225062101053)

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF

MS. KEERTHIKA B

FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES

Dr. M.G.R

EDUCATIONAL AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE

(Deemed to be university)

Maduravoyal, Chennai-600 095

(An ISO 9001-2008 certified Institution)

University with Special Autonomy Status

May 2024
i
 DECLARATION

I’m HEMA KUMAR R (Reg.No225062101053) hereby declare that the

project entitled “A STUDY ON EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT AT
SALCOMP MANUFACTURING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED” is done by me
under the guidance of MS. KEERTHIKA B is submitted in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the award of the degree in MASTER OF BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION.

PLACE:
DATE: Signature of the Student
 FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES

BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that this Project Report is the bonafide work of HEMA KUMAR R,
Reg.No:225062101074 who carried out the project entitled “A STUDY ON
EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT AT SALCOMP MANUFACTURING INDIA
PRIVATE LIMITED” under our supervision from 19.03.2024 to 30.04.2024.

Internal Guide Head of the Department

Submitted for Viva Voce Examination held on

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

To acknowledge here, all those who have been a helping hand in completing
this project, shall be an endeavor in itself

I extremely thankful to our Chancellor Thiru A.C.SHANMUGAM,B.A., B.L., our

President Er. A.C.S. ARUN KUMAR, B.E. I express my sincere thanks to our Secretary
Thiru A.RAVIKUMAR and our Vice Chancellor DR.S.GEETHALAKSHMI, I would like
to take the opportunity to express my profound gratitude to Dr. G BRINDHA, Professor
& head, and my project guide, Faculty of Management Studies, for her kind
permission to undergo project work successfully.

I thank MS.B.KEERTHIKA guiding me to execute my summer project. I also

thank all faculties and batch mates in Faculty of Management Studies, for their support
and guidance throughout the course of final year project.

I thank Mr.ANANDHAN of HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LIMITED for guiding

and supporting throughout my Internship.

I owe my wholehearted thanks and appreciation to entire staff of the company

for their cooperation and assistance during the project.

Name of The Student

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE PAGE
ABSTRACT

CHAPTER 1

1.1 Introduction about the topic

1.2 Industry Profile

Company Profile

1.03 Objectives of the study

1.4 Importance or Need of the study

1.5 Scope of the study

1.6 Limitation of the study

CHAPTER 2 - Review of Literature (Books and Journals)

CHAPTER 3 – Research Methodology

3.1 Research Design

Research Hypothesis & Methodology

Data Analysis (list the tools used) (Percentage Analysis is tool must
apart from that any two statistical tool must be used)

Sample size

Data collection approach

CHAPTER 4 - Data Analysis and interpretation

CHAPTER – 5

5.1 FINDINGS

5.2 SUGGESTION

5.3 CONCLUSION

REFERENCES

Questionnaire
 ABSTRACT:

Employee engagement is that the extent of commitment and involvement an employee has towards
their organization and its values. An engaged employee is conscious of business context and works
with colleagues to strengthen performance within the work for the advantage of the organization.
It's a positive attitude held by the workers towards the organization and its values. The project
specializes in how employee engagement is an antecedent i.e. the preceding factor of job
involvement and what should company do to form the workers engaged and also involves the steps
which shows the way to drive an engaged employee.

The project also includes study of the worker Engagement policies of the corporate and the way
they will be improved or modified so on increase the extent of Employee Engagement within the
organization. "More the worker engagement better is that the performance of the organization". The
major objective of the project is to seek out the worker Engagement status in SALCOMP
MANUFACTURING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Chennai and therefore the Improvements required for
improving the already implemented Policies. Basically, Employee engagement may be a concept
that's generally viewed as managing discretionary effort, that is, when employees have choices,
they're going to act during a way that furthers enhances their organization's interests. Also, another
objective is to research the feedbacks received and supported the analysis. suggesting solutions and
providing recommendations in order to enhance the worker engagement level.

Basically, engaged employees feel a robust emotional bond to the organization that employs them.
The metrology used for the research is categorized as Exploratory. Research with Descriptive type
because it involved individual analysis with results supported intuitions and judgments, it would be
my great pleasure, if this project can help the organization to realize its goal higher.
CHAPTER 1
 1.1 INTRODUCTION ABOUT THE TOPIC:

Employee engagement is the strength of the mental and emotional connection

employees feel toward the work they do, their team, and their organization.
Employee engagement describes the process of encouraging a positive attitude
amongst employees in order to maximize their performance. Unlike
performance-related pay, for example, initiatives to improve employee
engagement are not written in an employee's contract. They instead aim to
create an environment. where employees can see the overall aim of the
business, feel valued by their employers, and feel comfortable to express their
own views.

Nurturing this environment is an important task for senior management and

HR departments, as a positive attitude amongst staff can increase levels of
effort, output, innovation, and positivity, among many other things. However,
it is not simply up to them to create this atmosphere, the employees must also
be willing to engage with this environment.

Employee engagement is one of the powerful tools in the organization.

Employee engagement is the level of commitment, involvement, satisfaction
& enthusiasm, an employee has towards their work, organization, and its
values. An engaged employee is aware of business context and works with
colleagues to improve performance within the job for the benefit of the
organization by utilizing their natural talents.

FACTORS LEADING TO EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT

Previous study shows that there are some important factors which acts as a
base for Employee Engagement process they are
• Career Development- Opportunities for personal development
• Career Development – Effective Management of talent
• Leadership- Clarity of company values
• Leadership – Respectful treatment of employees
• Leadership – Company’s standards of ethical behavior
• Empowerment
• Image
• Equal opportunities & fair treatment
• Performance Appraisal
• Pay & benefits
• Health & Safety
• Job Satisfaction
• Communication
• Family friendliness
• Co-operation

Factors leading to Employee Engagement

 CATEGORIES OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT
There are three different type of people in organization based on their level
of commitment, involvement & satisfaction.

Actively Engaged
"Engaged" employees are builders. They want to know the desired
expectations for their role so they can meet and exceed them. They're
naturally curious about their company and their place in it. They work with
passion and they drive innovation and move their organization forward by
performing at high levels.

Partially engaged
“Partially-engaged” employees tend to concentrate on tasks rather than the
goals and outcomes they are expected to accomplish. They want to be told
what to do just so they can do it and say they have finished. They focus on
accomplishing tasks versus achieving an outcome.

Actively disengaged
"Actively disengaged" employees are the "cave dwellers." They're
"consistently against virtually everything." they're not just unhappy at work;
they’re busy acting out their unhappiness. They sow seeds of negativity at
every Opportunity.
 1.2 INDUSTRY PROFILE

The electronic industry, especially meaning consumer electronics, emerged in the 20th century
and has now become a global industry worth billions of dollars. Contemporary society uses all
manner of electronic devices built in automated or semi-automated factories operated by the
industry. Products are assembled from integrated circuits, principally by photolithography of
printed circuit boards. The size of the industry and the use of toxic materials, as well as the
difficulty of recycling has led to a series of problem with electronic waste. International
regulation and environmental legislation have been developed to address the issues.

History

The electronic power industry began in the 19th century and this led to the development of all

manner of inventions. Grama phones were an early invention and this was followed by radio

transmitters and receivers and televisions. The first digital computers were built in 1940s with a

slow development in technology and the vacuum tube, was largely supplanted by semiconductor

components the fundamental technology of the industry. In the 1990s the personal computer

becomes popular. A large part of electronics industry is now involved with digital technology.

The industry now employs large numbers of electronics engineers and electronics technicians to
design, develop, test, manufacture, install, and repair electrical and electronic equipment.
 COMPANY PROFILE

Salcomp develops and manufactures.

 Power supplies for mobile and other electronic devices, being a market leader in
smart phone chargers.
 IoT sensors based on Wirepas Mesh wireless connectivity technology, which
enables scalable, reliable, and cost efficient IoT solution.
 Precision structural parts and modules, 5G RF parts, magnetic materials
The cumulative production volume of 4 billion chargers makes Salcomp a pioneer in its industry.
The current annual capacity of our production plants is approximately 520 million pieces.
Salcomp’s headquarters are in Salo (Finland), and the production plants in Shenzhen and Guigang
(China), in Manaus (Brazil) and in Chennai and Noida (India). In addition to these locations, we
have offices in the USA, Brazil, Taiwan, South Korea and Hong Kong. During fiscal year 2019
Salcomp’s revenue was 601 million and the company has approximately 12,000 employees.

Salcomp is the world leading charger manufacturer and has provided close to 4 billion units of
mobile phone chargers for our customers in the past 3 decades, with power range from 2W to
100W. Salcomps future growth plans are focused on following categories.

History

2019 Salcomp acquired by Lingyi ITech

2017 Salcomp opens a new factory in Guigang, China

2016/2017 Two new factories in India supporting strong market growth

2014 AP6 acquires 45 percent of the shares in Salcomp

2013 A strategic desicion to expand offering to power banks and battery packs
2013 New local office set up in Tokyo, Japan

2012 A strategic decision to expand offering to wireless charging and LED drivers

2012 New local offices set up in Hong Kong, Silicon Valley, USA and Seoul, Korea

2011 Salcomp's shares delisted from the NASDAQ OMX Helsinki

2009 A strategic decision to expand offering to all external adapters and chargers

2009 New local office set up in Taipei, Taiwan

2008 Extended R&D center at the China plant

2007 A production plant in India

2006 Salcomp shares listed on NASDAQ OMX Helsinki

2005 A production plant in Brazil

2004 Manufacturing in Finland ends

2002 A production plant in China

2001 New local office set-up in Sao Paulo, Brazil

1999 Spin-off from Nokia and expansion of customer base to all major mobile phone
manufacturers

1998 Contract manufacturing begins in China

1995 A strategic decision to focus on mobile phone chargers

1988 The world's first switch mode quick charger for mobile phones

1983 Acquired by Nokia

1982 Manufacturing of power supplies begins

1975 Salcomp's Kemijärvi plant is founded

1973 Salcomp's plant in Uusikaupunki, Finland is founded

1973 Salcomp is established in Salo, Finland

Salcomp's mission
Salcomp power the smart world by providing the most innovative and highest
quality power supplies and power related solutions

Salcomp's vision
We become No. 1 in global adapter and charger markets and a leading company in
other power supplies and power related solutions.

Growth

➤ Increase order share in CMT business by focusing on fast chargers in China

and smart phones in India.

➤ Expand offering to key customers, for example wireless charging and

battery packs. Expand profitably into smart home segments

➤ Operational Efficiency
 ➤ Ramp up Guigang successfully

➤ Drive India local manufacturing to full potential

➤ Continuous profitability improvement in Brazil

➤ Improve material cost competitiveness

➤ Improve demand supply chain performance

SALCOMP VALUES

Customer Satisfaction
Customer satisfaction is the base for our operations. We aim to meet our customers´ current and future
needs and take their expectations into consideration at every turn.

We try to continuously improve customer satisfaction. All members of personnel, shareholders,

investors, authorities and other interest groups are also our customers and we treat them accordingly.

Respect and responsibility

We respect human rights and general ethical principles. We appreciate our customers, colleagues and
other co-operation partners. We accept diversity and treat everyone fairly under all circumstances. We
take responsibility for our products and operations, as well as the environment

Continuous learning

We develop our operations, personal skills and working methods on a continuous basis. We have an open
attitude towards new ideas, working methods and feedback and encourage an innovative, bold approach.
We recognize the need for change and development and react to them quickly. We accept also failures
and try to learn from them.
Achievement

We are committed to our common vision and goals. We realize that the continuity of our business is
based on profitability and it is our responsibility to contribute to it. We aim to increase the value of the
company through profitable and successful operations and business practices

Manufacturing
Salcomp’s strengths are flexible production resources and the ability to deliver large volumes globally. In
addition, with our highly efficient logistics we can provide truly global service. The annual capacity of
our five production plants manufacturing power adapters, chargers or LED drivers is over 600 million
pieces. Salcomp’s production plants are in Shenzhen and Guigang, China, in Chennai and Noida, India,
and in Manaus, Brazil. A global presence and three separate plants also enable efficient volume
allocation, thus resulting in lower costs for our customers.

Guigang and Shenzhen plant, China

 Salcomp’s biggest production plants
 Manufactures adapters and chargers for feature phones, smart phones, tablets, notebooks, set-
top boxes, point-of-sales devices, digital camcorders, digital photo frames, cordless fixed-line
phones, Bluetooth headsets and other electronic devices

 In addition to these, wireless charging pads, LED drivers and external battery packs are
manufactured

Chennai and Noida Plant, India

 Manufactures chargers for feature phones and smart phones

PRODUCTS

Salcomp is the world leading charger manufacturer and has provided close to 4
billion units of mobile phone chargers for our customers in the past 3 decades, with
power range from 2W to 100W. Salcomps future growth plans are focused on
following categories.
 Power
Standard chargers –Fixed output voltage 5-15w

Wireless Charging –

Solutions from 5w (qi bpp) to 15w (qi epp) output power with 1 to 4 coils

Power Supply

-Smart Home

-NoteBook

-Smart Lighting
 -Set Top Box

-Power Tool

High Power Products

-Adapter

-PC Power

Salcomp is one of the leading manufacturers of charger manufacturer across the globe. We serve
most of the leading mobile phone manufacturers by offering small, environmentally friendly
products.

Salcomp has several products / solutions available and we are continuously developing more
efficient solutions and in addition to USB PD also other fast charging protocols are developed /
supported.

Our continuous improvement is focused on efficiency improvement to enable higher power in

small product size. Our power density target in 30W power adapter technology is 20W/inch³ (cased
volume).

New technology enablers are GaN and planar transformers together with higher switching
frequencies. Also new novel control topologies are verified to further increase power density in
the coming future.

Salcomp has developed Qi-based solutions for our customers since 2011 and has been a member
of WPC since 2012. All our products meet the energy efficiency directives & requirements.
Carbon Fiber Products

Salcomp offers various Products made with Carbon Fiber:

Uni-direction Carbon Fiber Materials

Weave Carbon Fiber Materials

Thermal Plastics Carbon Fiber Materials

Carbon Fiber Applications

 Sport Goods
 Wearable
 Consumer Electronics
Plastic

Salcomp offers various technologies and solutions for Housing and Enclosure manufacturing.

Injection Molding and Decorating

Injection Compression Molding

Nano-Molding Technology (NMT)

Oriented Fiber Materials

IoT products
Salcomp has developed a set of reference products for high volume Wirepas mesh -based
IoT applications, e.g. asset / personnel tracking.

NODE / TAGS: battery-powered tags in different form-factors, e.g. in personnel ID card

shape, for moving and fixed installations

NODE / ANCHOR: AC-powered anchor / router device for fixed installations

QUALITY
Customer satisfaction is the base for our operations, and we aim to meet our customers’ current and future
quality requirements and take their expectations into consideration at every turn We comply with
extensive quality control systems and policies, and we continuously compile and monitor a wide range of
quality performance metrics. In addition to our own quality control measures and internal audits, our
major customers and independent inspection institutions regularly conduct quality audits of the
company’s operations globally.

Salcomp’s quality policy is:

 We aim to ensure customer satisfaction by supplying competitive products and services on
time.
 We are committed to meet customer requirements and to comply with relevant legislation
and regulations.
 We aim at internal customer relationship between business functions and processes.
Continuous improvement of quality is the responsibility of everyone. As part of our supply
chain management our partners play a significant role. We expect them to meet our
requirements and to further develop their own quality assurance systems.
 To reach these goals for our products, business processes and organizational structures are
continuously under development.
 1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

Aims and objectives of employee engagement

The objectives of employee engagement activities, essentially, are to create a high-performing and

engaged workforce by implementing infrastructure and employee engagement strategies that better

support your team.

Realising this engaged workforce requires that you address key employee engagement areas, by

implementing strategies to:

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES

 To align the employees with salcomp values

SECONDARY OBJECTIVES

• To Know Employee productivity

• To Improve Workplace Conditions that Drive engagement

• To Enhance Employees’ Sense of Well-being

• to know the factors of the Employee Motivation

Each of these six key areas should be utilised to address and improve your three essential employee

engagement objectives – business performance, employee experience and customer experience.

1.4 IMPORATANCE OF THE STUDY
1.5 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

Scope of the study This sector providing more opportunities for job enhancement but retaining
employee are one of the most challenging issues for the retail industry, because of high turnover
and low performance. Understanding what drives employee engagement illuminates the path
leaders can take to enhance employee retention, performance and motivation in their organizations.
Employee engagement in retail sector Goudraghavendra v., goudmadhusudhan, kumargiridhar
2014, studied employee engagement practices in retail sector in Kurnool states that gender and
team work has no significance influence on employee engagement. Dr. sushamapatil and
raneyvaneeta study on employee engagement practices of big bazaar and conclude that disengaged
employees are liability on organizations. Dr. lahotijyoti 2014 studied HR practices in retail sector
and finds to retain and motivate employee and engage them HR practices still developing.

Dr. manchala g. and kandulapatisuresh 2011, conducted study on retail sector in Hyderabad to
measure level of employee engagement in retail sector and influence of job satisfaction, managing
stress, relationship with coworker, distribution of work and work life balance on employee
engagement. He finds positive influence of job satisfaction on employee engagement. Dr.
pakkeerappa and kodikal (2012) conducted survey on retail sector to find retention strategies and
manage turnover among employees of retail sector and found “employee engagement” is one of
the tool they used to retain employees and manage turnover
 1.6 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

The Limitations of Employee Engagement Programs

Less Than 100% Participation

About the folks who choose not to participate in your rewards program: if their productivity is as
low as their participation, managers need to know. As for the big winners in your rewards
programs, you might want to give them mentorship opportunities or just set them free to soar. The
middle group should be the most interesting for managers. Although persuading average
performers to join the winners can be challenging, this is the biggest opportunity for increasing
employee engagement.
 CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
 2.1 REVIEW OF LITARETURE

Employee engagement has become a heavily discussed topic in recent years. However, there is

still ambiguity within the academic literature as to how employee engagement can be influenced

by management. There has been significant interest in employee engagement, but this has been

coupled with a good deal of misunderstanding. According to Kular et al (2008), this

misunderstanding can be partly attributed to the fact that there is no definitive definition, resulting

in engagement being operationalised and subsequently measured in varying ways.

From a HR perspective today, engagement continues to be an important consideration. Due to the

challenging economic climate, organisations now more than ever are deciding to restructure and

resize, which has resulted in organisations investigating new approaches to maintain and increase

engagement. Organisations fight to recruit and train their talent, so they need to do their best to

keep hold of it. Organisations need to strike the right balance between fostering and enhancing

employee engagement levels while at the same time not compromising their competitive position.

The connection between the attitudes and behaviours of employees and the link to the

organisations bottom line was first successfully displayed 19 years ago by US retail company

Sears. Sears advocated employee engagement in the form of the „employee-customer-profit

chain‟. The results which Sears attained from this initiative were astounding. In one year, Sears

transformed its biggest loss making 4 division (merchandising) from a $3bn loss to the company

into a $752m revenue generating division (De Vita, 2007).

As a result of the immense impact employee engagement had on Sears, HR consultancy firms

began to work with organisations to develop metrics in order to quantify employee attitudes and

behaviours and there resulting impact on customer satisfaction and organisational performance.

According to Jim Crawly, a principle at HR research and consultancy company Towers Perrin,

“while previously anyone would intuitively have said there is a link between people being well

disposed towards an organisation and the likelihood of that organisation being successful, now

there is evidence to prove it” (De Vita, 2007).

In December 2004, the Harvard Business Review released the results of a survey carried out by

the Corporate Leadership Council (CLC), which involved the compiling of 50,000 employee

engagement surveys in more than 59 countries worldwide. One of the main findings from the study

was that increased commitment can result in a 57% improvement in discretionary effort displayed

by employees. According to Buchanan (2004) the increased discretionary effort displayed by

employees produced on average, a 20% increase in individual performance and an 87% reduction

in desire to leave the organization.

According to Sirota, Mischkind & Meltzer (2005), from the analysis of their research on employee

attitudes, which was based on never before-published case studies and data from 920,000

employees from 28 multinational companies over four years, resulted in the generation of hard

data to prove that the share price of organizations with highly engaged employees increased on

average by 16% in 2004 in comparison to the industry average of 6%. Similarly, the stock price of

organizations with high 5 morale had superior performance to comparable companies in the same

industry by a ratio of 2.5:1 during 2004. Conversely the stock price of companies with low morale

underperformed in relation to the industry competitors by a ratio of 5:1.

According to Sirota (2005) “Morale e is a direct consequence of being treated well by the company,

and employees return the „gift‟ of good treatment with higher productivity and work quality, lower

turnover (which reduces recruiting and training costs), a decrease in workers shirking their duties,

and a superior pool of job applicants. These gains translate directly into higher company

profitability. Satisfied employees lead to satisfied customers, which results in higher sales.

Satisfied customers and higher sales, in turn, result in more satisfied employees who can enjoy the

sense of achievement and the material benefits that come from working for a successful company.

It‟s a „virtuous circle‟ – the best of all worlds

Engagement – Definition

Kahn (1990) was credited with conceptualising the term personal engagement which he defines as

“the harnessing of organisational members‟ selves to their work roles; in engagement, people

employ and express themselves physically, cognitively and emotionally during role

performances”.

The individual seeks to prevent total isolation or engulfment by being in a constant state of flux

towards and away from the group (Kahn 1990). Kahn named 6 this forward and backward flux as,

„personal engagement‟ and „personal disengagement‟. The cognitive aspect of employee

engagement deals with the employees beliefs about organisation factors such as, how it is led, by

whom and the working conditions which exist within the organisation. The emotional element

deals with how the employee feels about each of the three aforementioned factors and if they

possess a positive or negative attitude towards the organisation and its leader(s). The physical

aspect of Kahn‟s definition relates to the physical energies employed by individuals in order to

carry out their organisational role(s). The literature concerning employee engagement poses a
challenge due to the fact that there is no one universally applied definition to cover the topic of

employee engagement.

According to Baumruk (2004) employee engagement has been defined within the confines of

emotional and intellectual commitment to the organisation or the quantity of discretionary effort,

defined by Yankelovich), as the voluntary effort employees provide above and beyond what is

required by employees in their job (Frank et al 2004). From Kahn‟s definition it is clear that

employee engagement is a multi-faceted paradigm. The multi-dimensional approach to looking at

engagement comes from the perspective that Kahn took on the individual‟s working experience.

“on-going, emotionally charged and psychologically complex”. Truss et al (2006), define

employee engagement as a „passion for work‟, which encompasses the three 7 elements of

engagement, previously discussed by Kahn (1990) in one psychological state. Due to the varying

definitions of employee engagement, the results of different studies become difficult to examine.

This is because each study may look at the subject of employee engagement through a different

lens, depending on the definition they decide upon.

According to Ferguson (2007), with a universal definition of employee engagement lacking, it

cannot be accurately defined and thus it cannot be measured and thus managed. According to

Robinson et al (2004), while it has been noted that employee engagement has been defined in

numerous ways, a number of those definitions within their construct are similar to more established

con-structural definitions relating to organisational commitment and organisational citizenship

behaviour (OCB).

Robinson et al (2004) define engagement as „one step up from commitment‟, which begs the

question, is employee engagement just „old wine in a new bottle‟? Saks (2006) argues that
employee engagement differs from organisational commitment (OC) on the grounds that OC

represents a person‟s attitude and connection concerning their organisation, while on the other

hand, engagement is more than an attitude, it is how psychologically, cognitively and

behaviourally employed the individual is in their role, displayed by how attentive they are to their

work and how absorbed the individual is in the performance of the role. Employee engagement

also differs from OCB, as engagement is concerned with the passion for one‟s role, while OCB is

concerned with extra-role and voluntary behaviour.

The context for analysing the employee engagement phenomenon The employment relationship

is the arena in which employee engagement will either be fostered or negated.One of their first

finding was that productivity could be increased by reducing the amount of hours in the working

week, thus contradicting conventional worker productivity logic. However, while its purpose of

conception was to develop an alternative to Taylorism, the human factor industrial psychology

school had the Taylorian concept of industrial efficiency. The employment relationship was

shifting focus away from the isolated individual under Taylorism and towards a human relations

approach which was characterised by placing an emphasis on the workgroup and thus initiatives

to improve organisational performance were based on work group behaviour and response. The

human relations school of thought viewed the worker as a „social man‟ who desired social as well

as economic compensation from his work as opposed to the purely „economic man‟ which was

characterised under Taylorism. The empirical base and ideological construct of the human

relations school of thought has its origins in the human factor and anthropological phases of the

Hawthorn program. Technological advancements have caused the employment relationship to

evolve as explained by Woodward (1965) who employs the concept of a socio-technical system in

order to analyse various forms of production system and associated worker behaviour. Rose (1988)
reiterates Woodward‟s (1965) findings, stating that, “the effectiveness of a firm relates to the fit

between its production system and its formal organisation and not to the leadership style of

supervisors or to participative, interlocking teams”.

The neo-human relations school of thought is characterised by placing the focus on motivation of

the individual from a life perspective, which was conceptualised by Maslow in an article he

published concerning individual motivation in Psychological Review in 1943. Maslow‟s theory

was further developed by McGregor (Theory X and Y) and Hertzberg.

Engagement has its roots in motivational theory, which was first propositioned by Elton Mayo‟s

motivation experiments in Cicero, Chicago, 1927-1932. These experiments resulted in the

proposal that workers are motivated by emotional rather than economic factors. So an employee

will place more importance on being involved and feeling important than by an improvement in

workplace conditions. Mayo set down the groundwork on which later theorists, such as Hertzberg,

Maslow and McGregor would build their theories. However, academics such as Roethlisberger

and Dickinson (1939) have critiqued the validity of Mayo‟s study and come to the conclusion that

under the umbrella of the classic unitary stance, it is individual relations and thus communication

which act as the determinant of worker‟s behaviour, not the structural characteristics of

employment in a capitalist society.

From 1927 to now, theories have moved through various reassertions from industrial psychology

to total quality management, to organisational development. Pfeffer (1998) established the link

between the effective management of human capital resulting in successful business performance.

Engagement is now being considered as an aspect which the Human Capital Management theorists

are beginning to formulate metrics on. Also the interventions to facilitate and generate increased
engagement are being developed to foster increased performance levels and their measurable

impact on the bottom line of an organisation.

Human Capital Management Human capital management has become an important aspect in

relation to the development and sustainment of organisational competitive advantage.

Organisations have begun to recognise that a great deal of the added value created by the

organisation is becoming ever more dependent on assets other than physical capital (machines,

trucks, vans etc). There has been a shift towards placing an importance on the value which

intellectual capital adds to the organisation. The growth in recognition of these intangible assets

has stimulated the academic literature, with contributions from writers such as Mayo (2001), Miller

and Wurzburg (1995) and Sveiby (1997) to name a few.

Disengagement can be regarded as the decoupling of the psychological self from the work role

and involves people retracting and guarding themselves during role performances, Kahn (1990)

and Hochschild (1983). Employees that are not engaged are in effect „checked out‟. They float

through their work day, putting time, not energy or passion into their work. According to Robinson

(2006) every day, disengaged workers undermine what their engaged workers accomplish. So it

seems as though disengagement not only affects the individual who is disengaged, but the rest of

the organisation populous also. Disengaged employees exhibit piecemeal role performances

characterised by effortless, programmed or robotic actions (Kahn 1990). As a result of his study

Kahn discovered that three psychological conditions which were connected to engagement or

disengagement in the work environment:

meaningfulness, safety and availability. Kahn (1990) argued that employees propose to

themselves three fundamental questions within the context of each role situation: 1. How
meaningful is it for me to bring myself into this performance? 2. How safe is it to do so? 3. How

available am I to do so? Kahn (1990), from his research, found that the engagement level of

individual employees was enhanced in circumstances where increased psychological significance

and psychological safety were offered combined with their psychological availability.

Engagement and the Psychological States May et al (2004) was the first empirical study to test

Kahn‟s (1990) model. May et al (2004) establish that, in line with Kahn‟s (1990) study,

meaningfulness, safety and availability is strongly positively correlated to engagement. Job

enrichment (the development of increasing intrinsic job elements and down-grading attention of

extrinsic factors, Kaplan, Tausky & Bolaria [1969]) and role fit to be positively correlated with

meaningfulness; rewarding co-worker and encouraging supervisor relations were positively

correlated with safety. Conversely, loyalty to worker norms and self-consciousness were negative

predicators of safety. The amount of resources available to the individual were positively

correlated with psychological availability, on the other hand participation in outside activities was

negatively correlated with psychological availability. Meaningfulness was found to be the most

influential psychological dimension in determining engagement levels among individuals in the

workplace. 13 From researching the literature, an alternative model of engagement has emerged

from the „burnout‟ literature. Job engagement is perceived as a positive anti-thesis of burnout, as

according to Maslach et al (2001), individual burnout encompasses the attrition of engagement

with one‟s job/role. Maslach et al (2001) propose six determinable areas in the work-life

dichotomy, which can result in either burnout or engagement: workload, control, rewards and

recognition, community and social support, perceived fairness and values. Maslach et al (2001)

constructed a connection between increased job engagement and the management of the six work-

life areas. Engagement is facilitated by, a sustainable workload which challenges the individual
without negatively impacting them mentally and/or physically. Goal-setting theory (Locke 1968),

can be utilised in relation to the achievement of realistic workloads in order to enhance engagement

levels. Feelings of choice and control, suitable reward and recognition, the presence of a supportive

work community, fairness and integrity and meaningful and appreciated work will foster personal

engagement. May et al’s (2004) findings in relation to meaningful and valued work reiterated

Maslach et al (2001) belief that meaningful and valued work is associated with engagement and

thus the concept of „meaning‟ is an important consideration when looking at the engagement

generation process. Individual employee‟s perceptions of „meaning‟ are a pre-determinant of their

engagement levels and ultimately their level of performance (Holbeche & Springett 2003).

Holbeche & Springett (2003) propose that employees pro-actively seeks out to clarify meaning

within their work, organisations need to enable this clarification to take place or the employee will

become actively disengaged and is likely to leave the organisation. According to Holbeche &

Springett (2003) high levels of employee 14 engagement can only be facilitated through

workplaces which are characterised by a common purpose, which links people at an emotional

level and thus advances their personal hopes. From the research carried out by Kahn (1990), it has

been established that there are specific psychological states which need to be active in order for

engagement to occur. However, what Kahn (1990) does not fully explain is why individuals

respond to these psychological conditions in a variety of ways.

Saks (2006) proposes a link between the differing reactions and resulting engagement levels in

relation to the psychological states by looking through the lens of Social Exchange Theory (SET).

The SET frame of reference consists of obligations which are created via a cycle of interactions

between individuals/groups that operate in a condition of mutual interdependence. Under the SET,

the relationship will evolve over time, with trust, loyalty and mutual commitment increasing, on
the condition that the „rules‟ of exchange are not breached. Under SET, these „rules‟ tend to be

repayment rules, where the actions of one party cause the action/reaction of another party. This

form of interaction supports Robinson et al’s (2004) explanation of employee engagement being

characterised as a two-way relationship between employer and employee. As previously

mentioned under SET there are unspecified obligations within the employment relationship which

can facilitate engagement. The psychological contract is an attempt by academics to develop a

construct around which to place these implicit obligations and expectations.

Consequences of Engagement Saks (2006) proposed a split to the concept of engagement into two

distinct parts: (1) job engagement and (2) organisation engagement, which he puts forward are

related but separate constructs. He argues that the relationship between job and organisation

engagement vary in numerous ways, resulting in the inference that the psychological states which

result in the two aforementioned forms of engagement and their consequences are not the same.

The consequences of employee engagement, which have been discussed by academics and

practitioners tends to be positive. It has been proven that a highly engaged workforce can deliver

increased financial performance results for an organisation (Harter et al 2002).

This proof is evident from the previous example given by Sears. According to the Gallup‟s Q12

Index (Smith & Cantrell 2011), a 0.10 increase in engagement (on a five point scale) is worth an

estimated $100,000 in incremental profit per store per year as seen in the case of electronics store

Best Buy. Kahn (1990) didn‟t specifically mention the financial benefit to the organisation of

possessing a highly engaged workforce. He did propose in his 1992 study that high engagement

levels would produce positive consequences for the individual in the form of increased quality of

work and the increased enjoyment of the individual 17 experience of doing the work. A highly
engaged workforce would also confer positive consequences to organisational level outcomes in

the form of increased growth and productivity of the organisation (Kahn 1992).

Research carried out by the International Survey Research (ISR) team and Gallup is positively

correlated with the research of Harter et al (2002). Ott (2007) expands on the research findings of

Gallup and comments on the relationship between increased engagement and the increase in

earnings per share (EPS) among publically traded companies. Ott (2007) found that in publically

traded companies, if there were four or more engaged employees for every one disengaged

employee, the organisation would experience 2.6 times the growth than an organisation with had

a ratio of less than 4:1 engaged versus disengaged employees. From the meta-analysis carried out

by Gallup (2004), it was discovered that, the top quartile organisations which have the previously

mentioned 4:1 ratio or greater have, 12% higher customer support, 18% higher productivity and

12% higher profitability than the bottom quartile organisations. Conversely, the bottom quartile

organisations, according to the Gallup (2004) meta-analysis experience 31%-51% more employee

turnover and 62% more work related accidents than the organisations in the top quartile.
 CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
 3.1 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Methodology is a way to find out the result of a given problem on a specific matter or problem
that is also referred as research problem. In Methodology, researcher uses different criteria for
solving/searching the given research problem. Different sources use different type of methods for solving
the problem. If we think about the word “Methodology”, it is the way of searching or solving the research
problem.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Research design is an arrangement of conditions for collection and analysis of data in a manner
that aims to combine relevance to the research purpose with economy in procedure.

TYPE OF RESEARCH DESIGN

The type of research design adopted in this study is DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH.

DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH:
Descriptive research includes surveys and fact finding enquiries of different kinds and it can
report only what has happened. The purpose of the research is description of the state of affairs as
it exists at present. Descriptive research, also known as statistical research, describes data and
characteristics about the population or phenomenon being studied. Descriptive research answers
the questions who, what, when, where and how. A descriptive study is undertaken in order to
ascertain and able to describe the organization constantly engaged themselves in studying and
analyzing issues and hence are involved in some form of research activity as they make decisions
at the work place. It involves lot of factors like the research design, tools used etc, all these steps
and factors put together to bring out clear and accurate results.
SAMPLING METHOD:

The sampling method used in this study is PROBABILITY SAMPLING

PROBABILITY SAMPLING:
Probability sampling is also known as random sampling or chance sampling. Under
this sampling design, every item of the universe has a known and equal chance of getting
selected. Under the probability sampling, the type of sampling used is AREA SAMPLING.

AREA SAMPLING:
A method in which an area to be sampled is sub-divided into smaller blocks that are then
selected at random and then again sub-sampled or fully surveyed. This method is typically used
when a complete frame of reference is not available to be used.

SAMPLE SIZE:
Sample size determination is the act of choosing the number of observations or replicates to
include in a statistical sample. The sample size is an important feature of any empirical study in
which the goal is to make inferences about a population from a sample. The sample size for the
study is 140 which is finalized through a pilot study.

● SAMPLE SIZE FORMULA:

Since the population is unknown, the sample size is determined using the following
formula:

Sample Size = Z²pq

e²

Z = Confidence Interval = 95% = 1.96

p = No of Success = 90% = 0.9

q = No of Failure = 10% = 0.1

e = Error Term = 0.05

 Sample Size = (1.96)² * 0.9 * 0.1
(0.05)²

Size Sample = 140

DATA COLLECTION:

Data collection is a systematic approach to gathering information from a variety of

sources to get a complete and accurate picture of an area of interest. In this study responses are
collected through two different sources. The sources of data collection are;

❖ Primary data collection

❖ Secondary data collection

❖ PRIMARY DATA COLLECTION:

Primary data is a type of information that is obtained directly from first-hand sources
by means of surveys, observation or experimentation. It is data that has not been previously
published and is derived from a new or original research study and collected at the source such as
in mark

Primary data collection techniques used in this study is QUESTIONNAIRE METHOD.

Questionnaire was circulated to 140 respondents. In this study various questionnaire techniques
are used and they are:

i) CLOSED ENDED QUESTIONS

ii) OPEN ENDED QUESTIONS

i) CLOSED ENDED QUESTIONS:

Closed ended questions are just that: direct questions that ask for specific pieces of
information from a respondent. Closed questions have their greatest value when we need to obtain
facts and specific pieces of information. By their nature they limit the respondent field of choice
and length of response. A closed-ended question is a question format that limits respondents with
a list of answer choices from which they must choose to answer the question.

Different types of closed ended questions are,

● DICHOTOMOUS TYPE:
When a question has two possible responses, we consider it as DICHOTOMOUS
TYPE. Surveys often use dichotomous questions that ask for Yes/No, True/False,
Agree/Disagree.

● MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS:

Multiple choice questions are a type which has list of answer choices from which
they must choose to answer the question.

● RATING QUESTIONS:
A rating question asks survey respondents to compare different items using a
common scale a question that asks the participant to position each property or object on a
verbal, numeric, or graphic continuum. A rating scale is a set of categories designed to
elicit information about a quantitative or a qualitative attribute.

ii) OPEN ENDED QUESTIONS:

Open-ended questions are those questions that will solicit additional information
from the inquirer. Sometimes called infinite response or unsaturated type questions. By
definition, they are broad and require more than one or two word responses.

An open ended question is a question that cannot be answered with a simple yes or
no, or with only one or two words, where the person answering the question has to answer it in
his, or her own words.

❖ SECONDARY DATA COLLECTION:

Secondary data is collected by someone other than the user. Common sources of
secondary data for social science include censuses, organizational records and data collected
through qualitative methodologies or qualitative research.
 RESEARCH TOOLS:
Research tools can be defined as the instrument in the hands of researchers to measure
what they indent to in their study. There are various tools used in this study and they are:

a) Chi-Square test

(i) ꭓ2 -Test for goodness of fit

(ii) ꭓ2 - Test for Independence of Attributes

b) Rank correlation

c) Kruskal Wallis H test

d) Kolmogorov Smirnov test

e) Weighted Average Method

f) Interval Estimation

g) Percentage Analysis

h) Mann Whitney U-test

a) CHI SQUARE TEST:

A chi square test is a statistical test commonly used for testing independence and
goodness of fit. Testing independence determines whether two or more observations across two
populations are dependent on each other (that is, whether one variable helps to estimate the other).
Testing for goodness of fit determines if an observed frequency distribution matches a theoretical
frequency distribution.

The formula to calculate chi square test is,

χ² = ∑ (Oij – Eij)2 / Eij

Where
 Oij = observed frequency and

Eij = expected frequency = Eij = Ri Cj

Ri = No of Rows

Cj = No of columns

G = Grand total

The results of a chi square test, along with the degree of freedom, are used with a previously
calculated table of chi square distributions to find a p-value. The p-value can then be used to
determine the significance of the test.

b) RANK CORRELATION:

Correlation is a term that refers to the strength of a relationship between two

variables. Rank correlation t measures the degree of similarity between two rankings, and can be
used to assess the significance of the relation between them.

The formula to calculate Spearman’s rank correlation test is.

6𝛴𝑑2
R = 1 − {𝑛(𝑛2 −1)}

c) KRUSKAL WALLIS H TEST:

A non- parametric method for one way analysis of variance used to determine if
three or more samples originate from the same distribution. The Kruskal Wallis test essentially a
standard one way analysis of variance, with ranks assigned to the data points replacing the data
points themselves, and is applicable to more than sample groups.
 The formula for Kruskal Wallis H test is,

Hχ2 = 12 [R12/ n1 + R22 / n2 + R32 / n3 ] − 3 (n + 1)

n(n+1)

Where

R1 = R2 = R3 = Ranks assigned to the variables

n1 = n2 = n3 = No of respondents in each variables

n = Total No of respondents

d) KOLMOGOROV SMIRNOV TEST:

In statistics, the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test (K–S test) is a nonparametric test for

the equality of continuous, one-dimensional probability distributions that can be used to compare
a sample with a reference probability distribution (one-sample K–S test), or to compare two
samples (two-sample K–S test). The Kolmogorov–Smirnov statistic quantifies a distance between
the empirical distribution function of the sample and the cumulative distribution function of the
reference distribution, or between the empirical distribution functions of two samples.

The formula for Kolmogorov Smirnov test is;

KS = Max | p − q |

Where

p = Relative expected frequency

q = Relative observed frequency

e) WEIGHTED AVERAGE METHOD:

An average in which each quantity to be averaged is assigned a weight. These

weightings determine the relative importance of each quantity on the average. Weightings are the
equivalent of having that many like items with the same value involved in the average.

The formula for Weighted Average Method,

Weighted Average = Sum of weighted terms

Total No of terms

f) INTERVAL ESTIMATION:
The process of estimating a parameter of a given population by specifying an
interval of values and the probability that the true value of the parameter falls within this interval.

The formula used for interval estimation is;

Confidence Interval = p ± zα/2 √pq / n

Where

p = No of Success

q = No of Failure = 1− p

n = No of respondents

zα/2 = Confidence Level

g) PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS METHOD:

Percentage analysis is the method to represent raw streams of data as a percentage (a

part in 100-percent) for better understanding of collected data.

The formula for percentage analysis is,

Percentage Method = No of respondents replied x 100

Total no of respondents

h) MANN WHITNEY U - TEST:

The Mann Whitney U - test is a non-parametric test of the null hypothesis that
two samples came from the same population against an alternative hypothesis,
especially that a particular population against an alternative hypothesis, especially that
a particular population trends to have larger values than the other. Use of Mann
Whitney U Test will enable us to determine whether the two populations are identical.
The formula for Mann Whitney U-Test is,

U1= n1n2 + [(n1(n1+1)/2] – R1; U2= n1n2 + [(n2(n2+1)/2] – R2

Z = U-u

u
 CHAPTER 4
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
 ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION:

4.1 PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS

TABLE 4.1.1 GENDER OF RESPONDENTS

S. No Gender No. of. Respondents Percentage

1 Male 45 32

2 Female 95 68

TOTAL 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 32% of the respondents are male and 68%
of the respondents are female.

Interpretation: From the above table, it is found that 68% of the employees are female.

CHART 4.1.1 GENDER OF RESPONDENTS

GENDER PERCENTAGE

32%

FEMALE

68% MALE
TABLE 4.1.2 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE

S. No Years of experience No. of. Respondents Percentage

1 Less than 2 75 54

2 2-5 41 29

3 6-10 24 17

TOTAL 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 54% of the respondents are less than 2 years
of experience, 29% of the respondents are 2-5 years of experience, 17% of the respondents are 6-
10 years of experience.

Interpretation: From the above table, it is found that 54% of employees have less than 2 years of
experience.

CHART 4.1.2 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE

YEARS OF EXPERIENCE

6-10 years, 24

less than 2 year, 75

2-5 years, 41
TABLE 4.1.3 AGE OF THE EMPLOYEES

S. No. Age (years) No. of Respondents Percentage

1 Below 25 36 25

2 26-30 49 37

3 31-40 18 13

4 41-50 21 15

5 Above 50 16 11

TOTAL 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 25% of the respondents are below 25 years
old, 37% of the respondents are between 26 to 30 years old, 13% of the respondents are between
31 to 40 years old, 15% of the respondents are between 41 to 50 years old and 11% of the
respondents are above 50 years old.

Interpretation: It is found that 37% of the employees are between 26-30 years old.

CHART 4.1.3 AGE OF THE EMPLOYEES

Chart Title
40
37

30
24
20

10 13 15

0 11

Below 25
26 - 30 S
31 - 40 e…
41 - 50
Above 50
TABLE 4.1.4. AWARE ABOUT ORGANIZATION GOALS AND VALUS

S.NO OPENION NO. OF RESPONDANT PERCENTAGE

1 KNOW 120 86

2 DO NOT KNOW 20 14

TOTAL 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 86% of employees are of the opinion that
KNOW OUR COMPANY VALUES and 14% of the respondents have do not know opinion in
this regard.

Interpretation: It is found that 86% of the employees know their values

CHART 4.1.4 AWARE ABOUT ORGANIZATION GOALS AND VALUS

14%

86%

KNOW DO NOT KNOW

TABLE. 4.1.5 ROLE CLARITY

S.NO OPINION NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDANTS

1 KNOW 78 60

2 DO NOT KNOW 52 40

TOTAL 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 60% of employees are of the opinion that
KNOW THEIR NEEDS and 40% of the respondents have do not know their needs

Interpretation: It is found that 60% of the employees know their needs

CHART 4.1.5 ROLE CLARITY

DO NOT KNOW 52

KNOW 78

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
TABLE. 4.1.6 Appropriate recognition at good work.
S.NO OPINION NO. OF PERCENTAGE
RESPONDANTS

1 Strongly agree 40 30

2 Agree 50 34

3 Disagree 20 14

4 Strongly disagree 30 22

total 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 30% of employees are of the opinion that
strongly agree and 34% of the respondents have agree this and 14% of people are say negative and
22% of people say strongly negative

Interpretation: It is found that 34% of the employees are agree

CHART 4.1.6. APPROPRIATE RECOGNITION AT GOOD WORK.

strongly disagree,
30, 22% strongly agree, 42,
30%

disagree, 20, 14%

agree, 48, 34%

TABLE 4.1.7 WORK APPRECIATION

S. No Opinion No. of Respondents Percentage

1 Yes 122 87

2 No 18 13

TOTAL 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 87% of employees are of the opinion that our
work is appreciated, and 13% of the respondents feel our work is not appreciated.

Interpretation: It is found that 87% of the employees feel our work is appreciated.

CHART 4.1.7 WORK APPRECIATION

YOUR WORK IS APPRECIATED?

13%

YES
NO

87%
TABLE 4.1.8 WORK PERFORMANCE.

S.NO OPENION NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDANT

1 BORE 11 8

2 NOT INTEREST 30 21

3 HAPPY 45 32

4 INCREDIBLE 54 39

Total 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 8% of employees are of the opinion that feel
bore to coming work, and 21% of the people said no interest to coming to work, and 32% of people
said we are happy for coming to work, and 39% of people say we are incredibly happy for coming
to work.

Interpretation: It is found that 39% of the employees are feel incredibly happy when their coming
to work.

CHART 4.1.8 WORK PERFORMANCE.

BORE, 11, 8%
INCREDIBLE, 54, NOT INTEREST, 30,
39% 21%

HAPPY, 45, 32%

BORE NOT INTEREST HAPPY INCREDIBLE

TABLE 4.1.9 BEST WORK CULTURE

S. no Opinion No. of. Respondents Percentage

1 Communication and transparency 9 6

2 Respect and fairness 34 23

3 Trust and integrity 43 31

4 Teamwork 31 24

5 flexible 23 16

TOTAL 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 6% of employees feel communication and
transparency, and 23% feel respect and fairness, 31% feel trust and integrity, 24% feel teamwork
and 16% feel flexible.

Interpretation: It is found that 31% of employees feel trust and integrity is the best work culture.

CHART 4.1.9 best work culture.

16% 7%

24% Communication and transparency

22% Respect and fairness

Trust and integrity
Teamwork
31%
flexible
TABLE 4.1.9. best work culture

CHI SQUARE TEST FOR GOODNESS OF FIT

OPENION Communication Respect and Trust and Teamwork Flexible

and fairness integrity
transparency

Observed 9 34 43 31 23
Frequency

Expected 28 28 28 28 28
frequency

Null Hypothesis:

Ho: There is no significant difference between respondent opinion TOWAD FACT INF WORK
CUL

H1: There is a significant difference between respondent opinion. TOWAD FACT INF WORK
CUL

Ei = ∑ oi/n = (9+34+43+31+23)/5 = 28

Oi Ei (Oi-Ei)2 (Oi-Ei)2/Ei

9 28 (9-28)=361 12.9

34 28 (34-28)=36 1.29

43 28 (43-28)=225 8.04

31 28 (31-28)=9 0.32
 23 28 (23-28)=25 0.89

TOTAL 23.44

Test Statistic:

χ² = ∑ (Oi – Ej)2 / Ej

χ² =23.44= Calculated Value

Level of Significance:

α = 0.05

Table Value:

Degree of freedom = n-1(i.e.) 5-1 = 4

Table Value = 9.488

Conclusion:

Calculated Value > Table Value

23.44 > 9.488

Reject Ho

Hence, there is a significant difference between respondent opinion

TABLE 4.1.10 AREA OF IMPROVEMENT

S.NO OPENION NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDANT

1 Time management 38 27

2 Goal setting 43 31

3 Interpersonal communication 35 25

4 patience 24 17

total 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 27% of employees are of the opinion that to
improve time management and 31% of the respondent’s opinion must improve goal setting. and
25% of people opinion are to improve interpersonal communication, and 17% of people opinion
are to improve more patience.

Interpretation: It is found that 31 % of the employees’ opinion is even more improve

organization’s goal setting

CHART 4.1.10 AREA OF IMPROVEMENT

COLUMN1
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
time management goal setting interpersonal patience
communication

Column1
TABLE 4.1.11 ORGANIZATION’S STRENGTH

S. No Opinion No. of. Respondents Percentage

1 Strong employee attitude 12 9

2 Team management 47 33

3 High integrity 65 46

4 Discipline 11 8

5 environment 5 4

TOTAL 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 9% of employees feel that the organization
STRONG EMPLOYEE ATTITUDE, and 33% feel their team management, 46% feel high
integrity, 8% feel discipline, and 4% feel environment.

Interpretation: It is found that 46% of the employees sometimes feel that the organization biggest
strength is high integrity.

CHART 4.1.11 organization's strength.

organisation strength
70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
strong employee team management high integrity discipline environment
attitude
 TABLE 4.1.11 organization's strength.

KOLMOGOROV SMIRNOV TEST

opinion Strong Team High integrity Discipline Environment

employee management
attitude

Observed 9 33 46 8 4
Frequency

Expected 28 28 28 28 28
frequency

Null Hypothesis:

Ho: Organization’s biggest strength is follows normal distribution.

Alternative Hypothesis:

H1: Organization’s biggest strength is does not follow normal distribution.

Ei= ∑oi/n = (9+34+43+31+23)/5 = 28

Observed Cumulative Relative Expected Cumulative Relative Ks=|p-q|

frequency(p) frequency frequency
Frequency Frequency Frequency(q)

12 12 12/140=0.09 28 28 28/140=0.200 0.11

47 59 59/140=0.421 28 56 56/140=0.400 0.02

65 124 124/140=0.89 28 84 84/140=0.600 0.29

11 135 135/140=0.96 28 112 112/140=0.800 0.16

5 140 140/140=1 28 140 140/140=1 0

Test Statistic:

KS = Max | p − q |

KS = 0.29 = Calculated Value

Level of Significance: α = 0.05

Table Value:

Table Value = 0.565

Conclusion:

Calculated Value < Table Value

0.29 < 0.565

Accept Ho

Hence, Organization’s biggest strength is follows normal distribution.

TABLE 4.1.12 CAREER GROWTH PROSPECTS.

S.NO OPENION NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDANT

1 GOOD 54 38

2 AVERAGE 40 29

3 EXCELLENT 11 8

4 NOT INVOLVED 35 25

Total 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 38% of employees are of the opinion that
growing good theirs rolls, and 29% of the people growing average theirs rolls, and 8% of people
say we are growing excellent in our rolls, and 25% of people say we are not involved in our rolls.

Interpretation: It is found that 38% of the employees are of the opinion that growing good in our
rolls.

CHART 4.1.12 CAREAR GROWTH PROSPECTUS.

GOOD AVERAGE EXCELLENT NOT INVOLVED

NOT INVOLVED, 35,

25%

GOOD, 54, 38%

EXCELLENT, 11, 8%

AVERAGE, 40, 29%

TABLE 4.1.13 IMPACTS OF TRAINING EFFICIENCY ON EMPLOYEE VALUE
CREATION

RANK CORRELATION
Employee value(x) 30 42 36 26 6

Training(y) 21 34 50 14 20

Rx Ry d=(Rx-Ry) d2
3 3 0 0
1 2 -1 1
2 1 1 1
4 5 1 1
5 4 1 1
∑ d2 = 4

SPEARMAN’S RANK CORRELATION

6𝛴𝑑2
R = 1 − {𝑛(𝑛2 −1)}

24
= 1 − {5(52 −1)}

24
=1−{ }
120

R = 0.8

Conclusion: R = 0.8 indicates high degree of correlation between the variables as it is nearer to 1.
It can therefore be concluded that efficient training increases employee value in organization and
are highly correlated to each other.
TABLE 4.1.14 FREEDOM OF EMPLOYEE

S.NO OPENION NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDANT

1 Adequate freedom 38 27

2 good 43 31

3 strict 35 25

4 No Freedom 24 17

total 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 27% of employees are of the opinion that we
have Adequate freedom in my factory. and 31% of the respondent’s opinion is good. and 25% of
people says my factory is strict. and 17% of people opinion is or factory doesn’t give freedom.

Interpretation: It is found that 31 % of the employees’ opinion is good.

CHART 4.1.14 FREEDOM OF EMPLOYEE

COLUMN1
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Adequate freedom good strict No Freedom

Column1
TABLE 4.1.15 CONTRIBUTION OF TECHNOLOGY
WEIGHTED AVERAGE METHOD:
Factors R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Total Rank

Career advancement 53 41 23 12 11 35.5 3

Increases accuracy 44 33 40 13 10 33 5

Saves time 60 34 25 20 11 37.5 1

Decreases complexity 44 40 31 14 11 34.1 4

Rational decision making 56 43 20 12 9 36.3 2

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that saving time is major influence of technology
by employees as it is ranked 1st, followed by rational decision making as it is ranked 2nd, whereas
career advancement, decreases complexity, increases accuracy are ranked as 3 rd, 4th, 5th
respectively.
Interpretation: It is found that saving time is major opinion of organization technology.

TABLE 4.1.15 CONTRIBUTION OF TECHNOLOGY

KRUSKAL WALLIS TEST
Career 53 41 23 12 11
advancement

Saves time 60 34 25 20 11

Rational decision 56 43 20 12 9
making

Series Responses Rank

A 60 1
C 56 2
 A 53 3
C 43 4
A 41 5
B 34 6
B 25 7
A 23 8
B 20 9.5
C 20 9.5
A 12 11.5
C 12 11.5
A 11 13.5
B 11 13.5
C 9 15

k=3
n1 = 5, n2 = 5, n3 = 5
n = 15
R1 = 3+5+8+11.5+13.5= 41
R2 = 1+6+7+9.5+13.5 = 37
R3 = 2+4+7+9.5+11.5+15 = 42

Null Hypothesis:

Ho: μ1 = μ2 = μ3

There is no significant difference between employee opinions towards organization technologies.

Alternative Hypothesis:
H1: μ1≠ μ2≠ μ3
There is a significant difference between employee opinions towards organization technology.
Test Statistic:

Hχ2 = 12 [R12/ n1 + R22 / n2 + R32 / n3 ] − 3 (n + 1)

n(n+1)
Hχ2 = 0.05 [336.2+273.8+352.8] − 48

Hχ2 = 0.14 = Calculated Value

Table value:

Degree of freedom = K − 1 = 2
Table Value = 5.991

Conclusion:
Calculated Value < Table Value
0.14 < 5.991
Accept Ho

Hence, there is no significant difference between employee’s opinion towards organization

technology
TABLE 4.1.16 IMPACTS ON RESKILLING OF EMPLOYEE PERFOMANCE

S. No Opinion No. of Respondents Percentage

1 Yes 122 87

2 No 18 13

TOTAL 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 87% of employees are of the opinion that
reskilling is essential to enhance the employee performance and 13% of the respondents have a
negative opinion in this regard.

Interpretation: It is found that 87% of the employees feel that reskilling is essential to enhance
the employee performance.

CHART 4.1.16 IMPACT ON RESKILLING OF EMPLOYEE OF PERFOMANCE

13, 13%

Yes
No

87, 87%
INTERVAL ESTIMATION:

Confidence Interval = p ± zα/2√pq / n

Were,

p = No of Success = 0.87

q = No of Failure = 0.13

n = No of respondents = 140

zα/2 = Confidence Level = 1.96

Confidence Interval = 0. 87 ± 1.96√ (0.87). (0.13)/140

= 0.87 ± 0.05

C.I = 0.82, 0.92

Conclusion: It is found that the statistical parameter lies between 0.82 and 0.92. Hence it is
concluded that reskilling is essential to enhance the employee performance in the population
parameter ranges between 82% and 92% respectively.
TABLE 4.1.17 THE FACTORS OF TO DO A GOOD JOB.

S.NO OPENION NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDANT

1 A healthy work culture 54 38

2 Having good mentor 40 29

3 My family 11 8

4 Hard work 35 25

Total 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 38% of employees are of the opinion that a
healthy work culture is motivate me to do a good job, and 29% of the people’s opinion is we have
a good mentor to do a good job, and 8% of people say my family is motivates me, and 25% of
people say our hard work is motivates me to do a good job.

Interpretation: It is found that 38% of the employees are of the opinion that a healthy work culture
is motivate me to do a good job.

CHART 4.1.17 THE FACTORS OF TO DO A GOOD JOB

A healthy work culture Having good mentor My family Hard work

Hard work, 35, 25%

A healthy work
culture, 54, 38%

My family, 11, 8%

Having good mentor,

40, 29%
TABLE 4.1.18 VARIOUS FACTORS OF WORK ENVIRONMENT TOWARDS
RESKILLING OF EMPLOYEES

WEIGHTED AVERAGE METHOD:

Factors R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Total Rank

Technological Advancement 60 41 18 11 10 36.9 3

Superior support 45 34 28 18 15 33.1 5

Learning environment 60 40 18 12 10 36.5 4

Job sustainability 61 41 23 10 5 37.5 1

Develop new skills 60 42 24 6 8 37.3 2

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that job sustainability is majorly preferred by the
employees as it is ranked 1st, followed by developing new skills as it is ranked 2nd, whereas
technological advancement, superior support, learning environment are ranked as 3rd, 4th, 5th
respectively.

Interpretation: It is found that job sustainability is majorly preferred by employees towards

reskilling on work environment.

TABLE 4.1.18 VARIOUS FACTORS OF WORK ENVIRONMENT TOWARDS RESKILLING

OF EMPLOYEES

KRUSKAL WALLIS TEST

Technological 60 41 18 11 10
Advancement

Job sustainability 61 41 23 10 5

Develop new skills 60 42 24 6 8

 Series Responses Rank
B 61 1
A 60 2.5
C 60 2.5
C 42 4
A 41 5.5
B 41 5.5
C 24 7
B 23 8
A 18 9
A 11 10
A 10 11.5
B 10 11.5
C 8 13
C 6 14
B 5 15
k=3
n1 = 5, n2 = 5, n3 = 5; n = 15
R1 = 2.5+5.5+9+10+11.5 = 38.5
R2 = 1+5.5+8+11.5+15 = 41
R3 = 2.5+4+7+14+13 = 40.5

Null Hypothesis:

Ho: μ1 = μ2 = μ3

There is no significant difference between work environment and employee reskilling Alternative
Hypothesis:
H1: μ1≠ μ2≠ μ3
There is a significant difference between work environment and employee reskilling
Test Statistic:

Hχ2 = 12 [R12/ n1 + R22 / n2 + R32 / n3 ] − 3 (n + 1)

n(n+1)

Hχ2 = 0.05 [296.45+ 336.2+ 328.05] – 48

Hχ2 = 0.035 = Calculated Value

Table value:

Degree of freedom = K − 1 = 2

Table Value = 5.991

Conclusion:
Calculated Value < Table Value
0.035 < 5.991

Accept Ho

Hence, there is no significant difference between work environment and employee reskilling
TABLE 4.1.19 MOTIVATE TOWARD WORK GOALS

S.NO OPENION NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDANT

1 VERY HIGH 40 30

2 HIGH 50 34

3 LOW 20 14

4 AVERAGE 30 22

total 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 30% of employees are of the opinion that
INSPIRED very high ,and 34% of the respondents have inspired high ,and 14% of people are say
inspired low, and 22% of people say inspired average.

Interpretation: It is found that 34% of the employees are inspired high by their work goals

CHART 4.1.19 MOTIVATE TOWARD WORK GOALS.

average average, 30

low low, 20

high
high, 48

very high
very high, 42

0
10
20
30
40
50
TABLE. 4.1.20 INSPIRED TO MEET MY GOALS AT WORK
S.NO OPINION NO. OF PERCENTAGE
RESPONDANTS

1 Strongly agree 40 30

2 Agree 50 34

3 Disagree 20 14

4 Strongly disagree 30 22

total 140 100

Findings: From the above table, it is understood that 30% of employees are of the opinion that
strongly agree and 34% of the respondents have agree this and 14% of people are say negative and
22% of people say strongly negative

Interpretation: It is found that 34% of the employees are agree

CHART 4.1.20 INSPIRED TO MEET MY GOALS AT WORK.

strongly
disagree, 30,
22% strongly agree,
42, 30%

disagree, 20,
14%

agree, 48, 34%

CHAPTER 5
FINDINGS

 it is found that 68% of the employees are female.

 it is found that 54% of employees have less than 2 years of experience.
 It is found that 37% of the employees are between 26-30 years old.
 It is found that 86% of the employees know their values.
 It is found that 60% of the employees know their needs.
 It is found that 34% of the employees are agree.
 It is found that 87% of the employees feel our work is appreciated.
 It is found that 39% of the employees are feel incredibly happy when their coming to work.
 It is found that 31% of employees feel trust and integrity is the best work culture.
 It is found that 31 % of the employees’ opinion is even more improve organization’s goal
setting.
 It is found that 46% of the employees sometimes feel that the organization biggest strength
is high integrity.
 It is found that 38% of the employees are of the opinion that growing good in our rolls.
 R = 0.8 indicates high degree of correlation between the variables as it is nearer to 1. It can
therefore be concluded that efficient training increases employee value in organization and
are highly correlated to each other.
 It is found that 31 % of the employees’ opinion is organization culture motivates me
towards work goals.
 It is found that saving time is major opinion of organization technology.
 It is found that 87% of the employees feel that reskilling is essential to enhance the
employee performance
 It is found that 38% of the employees are of the opinion that a healthy work culture is
motivate me to do a good job.
 It is found that job sustainability is majorly preferred by employees towards reskilling on
work environment.
 It is found that 34% of the employees are inspired high by their work goals.
 It is found that 34% of the employees are agree.
SUGGESTIONS

In most of the finding’s majority of the employees have given the positive response but

still the responses which have lower than 85% positive feedback, company needs to concentrate

on that like

 Company needs to align the employees with the organization’s value with the help of

counseling, so employee scan gets closer to company.

 Again, there are also a good number of actively disengaged & not engaged people

according to the survey question. So infinite skills being an employer of choice should

focus more on increasing the employee active participation & engagement to achieve the

organizational goals & objectives.

 Also, the employees should be given more flexible way of delivering the best in their own

method & way.

 It is also important to make the employees feel that their contribution is especially

important & valuable to their company.

 Organization may increase the frequency of training as employees have mentioned that
sometimes they are given training to upgrade towards emerging technologies.
CONCLUSION

Every organization wants to be ahead in this competitive market and for the same

organization needs to have the well engaged employees. The engagement of employees depends

on the different aspects as I have studied in this research. There is no doubt that well engaged

employees are asset to the company and thereby the growth chances of the organization increase

simultaneously.

With this effect every organization should understand the importance of engaged employees and

they should implement the different policies for the effective employee engagement in the

organization. With the help of this study, I found that “Infinity Skills” has an effective engaged

employee staffs which will defiantly help the organization to grow in this organization.
 QUESTIONNARIES ON THE EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT

1.Gender of the employees

 Male
 Female

2.How many years of experience have?

 Less than 2 years

 2-5 years

 6-10 years

 11-15 years

 15+ years

3.Age group

 25 and below

 26-30

 31- 40

 41- 50

 above 50

4.Do you know your organization goals and values?

 a) Know

b) I do not know

5.Do You know your role in organization?

a) I know
b) b)

6.have you get appropriate recognition at your work?

 strongly agree

 agree

 disagree

 strongly disagree

7.Do you get jo appreciation from the organization?

 Yes

 No

8.How you feel your work performance?

 bored

 not interest
 happy

 incredible

9.What is the work culture of your company?

 communication & transparency

 Respect & fairness

 trust & integrity

 teamwork

 flexibility

10.Which area do you think needs further improvement?

 time management

 goal setting

 interpersonal communication

 patience

11.What is the strength of your organization?

 strong employee attitudes

 team management

 high integrity

 discipline
12.How you feel about your career growth?

 good

 average

 excellent

 not interest

13.WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS OF TRAINING EFFICIENCY ON EMPLOYEE VALUE CREATION AT YOUR
ORGANIZATION?

14.Freedom of the organization

 Adequate freedom

 good

 strict

 no freedom

15.What is the contribution of technology in your factory?

 career advancement

 increases accuracy

 saves time

 decreases complexity
 rational decision making

16.Do you have the impacts on reskilling of employee performance?

 yes

 no

17.What are the factors of to do a good job?

 a healthy work cultures

 having good mentor

 my family supports

 hard work

18.What are the VARIOUS FACTORS OF WORK ENVIRONMENT TOWARDS RESKILLING OF EMPLOYEES?

 Superior support
 Learning environment
 Job sustainability
 Develop new skills
 Technology environment

19.What are the motivating factors towards wok goals?

  VERY HIGH
 HIGH
 LOW
 AVERAGE

20.Do you inspired to meet your goal at work?

 Strongly agree
 Agree
 Disagree
 Strongly disagree
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

 Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E., & Brummelhuis, L.L. (2012). Work engagement,
performance, and active learning: the role of conscientiousness. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 80, 555 – 564.
 Bakker, A.B., Shimazu, A., Demerouti, E., Shimada, K., & Kawakami, N.
(2014). Work engagement versus workaholism: a test of the spillover-crossover
model. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29, 63 – 80.
 Bledow, R., Schmitt, A., Frese, M., & Kuhnel, J. (2011). The affective shift model of
work engagement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 1246 – 1257.
 Breevaart, K., Bakker, A., Hetland, J., Demerouti, E., Olsen, O.K., & Espevik, R.
(2014). Daily transactional and transformational leadership and daily employee
engagment. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87, 138 – 157.
 Christian, M.S., Garza, A.S., & Slaughter, J.E. (2011). Work engagement: A
quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual
performance. Personnel Psychology, 64, 89 – 136.
 Crawford, E.R., LePine, J.A., & Rich, B. L. (2010). Linking job demands and
resources to employee engagement and burnout: A theoretical extension and meta-
analytic test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 834 – 848.
 Harter, J.K., Schmidt, F.L., & Hayes, T.L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship
between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a
meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 268-279.
 Kahn, W.A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and
disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692 – 724.
 Macey, W., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial
and Organizational Psychology, 1, 3 – 30.
 May, D.R, Gilson, R.L., & Harter. L.M. (2004). The psychological conditions of
meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at
work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 11-37.
 Rich, B.L., LePine, J.A., & Crawford, E.R. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and
effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 617 – 635.
 Salanova, M., Agut, S., & Piero, J.M. (2005).