ABSTRACT The research is on the basis of A STUDY ON “QUALITY OF WORK LIFE” AT PEST CONTROL INDIA PVT. LTD. Quality of work life refers to the favorableness or un – favorableness of a total job environment of the people. The basic purpose is to develop jobs and working conditions that are excellent for people as well as for the economic health of the organization. The purpose of this study was to explore to experience of workers towards their Quality of work life and their work environment in terms of stress, perception of employee, relationship between co-workers, work load, time pressure and work-balance etc. The aim of the study includes the following factors towards the quality of Work life. They are such as poor working condition environments, resident aggression, balance of work and family, work load, inability to deliver quality of care preferred, shift timing, lack of involvement in work process and decision –making, poor relationship between supervisor/ Team Leader, role conflict, lack of recognitions and lack of opportunity to learn new skills. The study was based on the descriptive research design. The sampling design being used here is Simple Random sampling through lottery method. The sample size 50 has been used out of total universe of 100. More than half of the respondents (52%) have low level of 1
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
ABSTRACT
The research is on the basis of A STUDY ON “QUALITY OF WORK LIFE” AT
PEST CONTROL INDIA PVT. LTD. Quality of work life refers to the favorableness
or un – favorableness of a total job environment of the people. The basic purpose is to
develop jobs and working conditions that are excellent for people as well as for the
economic health of the organization. The purpose of this study was to explore to
experience of workers towards their Quality of work life and their work environment in
terms of stress, perception of employee, relationship between co-workers, work load,
time pressure and work-balance etc. The aim of the study includes the following factors
towards the quality of Work life. They are such as poor working condition environments,
resident aggression, balance of work and family, work load, inability to deliver quality of
care preferred, shift timing, lack of involvement in work process and decision –making,
poor relationship between supervisor/ Team Leader, role conflict, lack of recognitions
and lack of opportunity to learn new skills.
The study was based on the descriptive research design. The sampling
design being used here is Simple Random sampling through lottery method. The sample
size 50 has been used out of total universe of 100. More than half of the respondents
(52%) have low level of Overall quality of work life. There is a significant relationship
between the experience of the respondents with regard to various dimensions of level of
Adequate income and Fair Compensation, Opportunities for growth & security, Work &
life space, Social relevance & work life & quality of work life. Improving good
relationship with employees and providing friendly environment in the organization.
Employees may be given high motivation from the top management of the Company. The
Company has to measure the quality of work life periodically.
1
CONTENT
DECLARATION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
Chapter
Title Page No.
I INTRODUCTION 1
II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 21
III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 26
IV ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 34
V FINDINGS , SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSION 52
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ANNEXURE
2
LIST OF TABLES
Table No.
Title Page No.
1 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY AGE GROUP 34
2 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY MARITAL STATUS 35
3 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY SEX 36
4 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY DESIGNATION 37
5 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY DEPARTMENT 38
6 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY YEARS OF EXPERIENCE 39
7 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY THEIR LEVEL OF QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
40
8 ‘t’ TEST BETWEEN THE RESPONDENTS MARITAL STATUS WITH REGARD TO QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
42
9 ‘t’ TEST BETWEEN THE RESPONDENTS SEX WITH REGARD TO QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
44
10 ‘t’ TEST BETWEEN THE RESPONDENTS DEPARTMENT WITH REGARD TO QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
46
11 ONE WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE AMONG DESIGNATION OF THE RESPONDENTS WITH REGARD TO QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
48
12 KARL PEARSON’S COEFFICIENT OF CORRELATION BETWEEN RESPONDENTS’ AGE AND VARIOUS ASPECTS OF QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
50
13 KARL PEARSON’S COEFFICIENT OF CORRELATION BETWEEN RESPONDENTS’EXPERIENCE AND VARIOUS ASPECTS OF QUUALITY OF WORK LIFE
51
3
LIST OF FIGURES
FIG No. Title Page No.
1 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY AGE GROUP 34
2 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY MARITAL STATUS 35
3 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY SEX 36
4 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY DESIGNATION 37
5 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY DEPARTMENT 38
6 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY YEARS OF EXPERIENCE 39
4
INTRODUCTION
Quality is generally defined as “Conformance to requirements”. Quality is “as fitness for
purpose”. The concept of quality is not apply to all goods and services created by human beings,
but also for workplace where the employees were employed.
Quality in the workplace comes from understanding and then fully meeting, the needs of
all your internal and external customers, now and into the future and doing so with continual
improvement in efficiency and effectiveness.
Quality of work life refers to the favorableness or un – favorableness of a total job
environment of the people. The basic purpose is to develop jobs and working conditions that are
excellent for people as well as for the economic health of the organization. Quality of work life
provides a more humanized work environment. It attempts to serve the higher – order needs of
workers as well as their more basic needs. It seeks to employ the higher skills of workers and to
provide an environment that encourages improving their skills.
Q - Quest for excellence
U - Understanding
A - Action
L - Leadership
I - Involvement of the people
T - Team spirit
Y - Yardstick to measure progress
The above said are very essential things to improve the work life of employees in the
organization.
5
THEORETICAL REVIEW:
DEFINITION
Quality of work life means “the degree to which members of a work organization are able
to satisfy important personal needs through their experience in the organization”
Quality of work life could be defined as “the Quality of the relationship between the man
and task.
MEANING
Quality of work life has gained deserved prominence in the Organizational Behavior as
an indicator of the overall of human experience in the work place. It expresses a special way of
thinking about people their work, and the organizational in which careers are fulfilled.
Quality of work life refers to the relationship between a worker and his environment,
adding the human dimension to the technical and economic dimensions within which the work is
normally viewed and designed. Quality of work life focus on the problem of creating a human
working environment where employees work co – operatively and achieve results collectively. It
also includes.
The programme seeks to promote human dignity and growth
Employees work collaboratively They determine work change participate
The programmes assume compatibility of people and organization
Quality of work life refers to the level of satisfaction, motivation, involvement and
commitment individuals experience with respect to their line at work Quality of work life is the
degree of excellence brought about work and working conditions which contribute to the
overall satisfaction and performance primarily at the individual level but finally at the
organizational level.
CONCEPT
Quality of work life is a prescriptive concept, it attempts to design work environments so
as to maximize concern for human welfare. Quality of work life acts in two dimensions.
Goal
Process
6
Quality of work life acts as goal by
Creation of more involving
satisfying and effective jobs
Work environment for people at all levels of the organization
Quality of work life acts as process by
Make efforts to realize this goal through active participation
The whole essence of Quality of work life may be stated thus, the Quality of work life is
co – operative rather than authoritarian; evolutionary and open rather static and rigid; informal
rather than mechanistic; mutual respect and trust than hatred against each other.
Objectives of QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
The major three main objectives for the Quality of work life are
Improve employees satisfaction strengthen workplace learning, and
Better manage on – going chance and transition
MAJOR FACTORS AFFECTING THE QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
Quality of work life means having good supervision, good working conditions, good pay
and benefits an interesting and challenging, and a rewarding job. The major factors that effect the
Quality of work life may be stated thus.
Pay
Quality of work life is basically built around the concept of equitable pay. In the days
ahead, employees may want to participate in the profits of the firm as will. Employees must be
paid their due share in the progress and prosperity of the firm.
Benefits
Workers throughout the globe have raises their expectations over the years and now feel
entitled to benefits that were once considered a part of the bargaining process.
7
Job Security
Employees want stability of employment. They do not like to be the victims of whimsical
personal policies and stay at the mercy of employers.
Alternative Work Schedules
Employees demand more freedom at the workplace, especially in scheduling their work.
Among the alternative work schedules capable of enhancing the Quality of work lifefor some
employees are:
i. Flexi time: A system of flexible working hours,
ii. Staggered hours: Here groups of employees begin and end work at different intervals.
iii. Compressed workweek: It involves more hours of work per day for fever days, per week.
iv. Job enrichment: It attempts to increase a person's level of output by providing that
persons with exciting, interesting, stimulating or challenging work.
v. Autonomous work groups (AWGs): Here a group of workers will be given some control
of decision-making and have responsibility for a task area without day-to-day
supervision, and with authority to influence and control both group members and their
behavior.
Occupational Stress
Occupational mental-health programmes dealing with stress are beginning to emerge as a
new and important aspect of Quality of work life programmes. Obviously, and individual
suffering from an uncomfortable amount of job-related stress cannot enjoy a high quality of work
life. '
Worker Participation
Employees have a genuine hunger for participation in organizational issues affecting their
lives. Naturally they demand far more participation in the decision making process at the
workplace.
Social Integration
8
The work environment should provide opportunities for preserving an employee's
personal identify and self-esteem through freedom from prejudice, a sense of community,
interpersonal openness and the absence of stratification in the organization.
Work and total life space
A person's work should not overbalance his life. Ideally speaking, work schedules, career
demands and other job requirements should not take up too much of a person's leisure time and
family life.
WAYS TO CREATE HIGH QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
Quality of work life deals with the relationship between every employee and his or her
work organization. This relationship is formal in sometimes less formal. This contract is
psychological; contract. "Psychological contract is the set of expectations held be the individual
specifying what the individual and the organization expect to give and receive from each other in
the course of their working relationship". This contract represents the expected exchange of
values that encourages the individual to work for the organization and motivates the organization
to employ that person, (i.e.) Contribution and Inducements.
A healthy psychological contract means that inducements and contributions are balance.
INDUCEMENTS = CONTRIBUTIONS
(Organization to employees) = (employee to organization)
9
This is the way for organization to create healthy psychological contract and Jobs
satisfaction for their members is to provide them with High Quality of work life environment.
ASPECTS OF HIGH QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
Quality of work life is highlighted by the following Benchmarks of managerial
excellence.
Participation:- Involving people from all levels of responsibility in decision-making
Trust:- Reside signing jobs systems and structures to give people more freedom at
work.
Reinforcement:- Creating reward systems that are fair, relevant and contingent on work
performance
Responsiveness:- Making the work setting more pleasant and able to serve individual Needs.
QUALITY OF WORK LIFE PROGRAMMES
Quality of work life programmes concentrate on creating a working environment that is
Conductive to the satisfaction of worker needs. This program assumes that a job and the work
environment should be structured to meet as many of the workers needs as possible.
Richard Walton has organized into eight categories. These should be integrated,
coordinated and properly managed.
10
These programmes are helped to avoid some pitfalls like
Quality of work life program must be implemented with the co-operation of management
and labour.
Action plans must be carried to completion.
Care must be taken to concentrate the focus on the joint objectives of improving the
Quality of work life.
RESULTS OF HIGH QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
High Productivity
Increase organizational effectiveness
High employee satisfaction
High morale.
Reduce the absenteeism and labour turn over
Increase the quality of life of employees
High employee involvement
Peaceful industrial relation
11
MEASUREMENT:
A recent statistical analysis of a new measure, the Work-Related Quality of Life
scale (WRQoWL), indicates that this assessment device should prove to be a useful instrument.
The WRQoWL measure uses six 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 (JCS) scale of the Work-Related Quality of Life scale
(WRQoWL) 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
WRQoWL measure, Job &Career Satisfaction scale 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
(WRQoWL), 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 WRQoWL General Well Being factor assesses
issues of mood, depression and anxiety, life satisfaction, general quality of life, optimism and
1988) define the qualities of work life are broadly similar to the study on Singaporean
Employees Development suggest four dimensions of Quality of work life labeled as, i) Favorable
28
work environment ii) Personal growth and autonomy iii) Nature of job and iv)Stimulating
opportunities and co-workers Good performance is recognized in addition to rewards being
based upon performance while employees are respected and treated like mature people.
Baba and Jamal (1991) listed what they described as typical indicators of
quality of working life, including: job satisfaction, job involvement, work role ambiguity, work
role conflict, work role overload, job stress, organizational commitment and turn-over intentions.
Baba and Jamal also explored routinisation of job content, suggesting that this facet should be
investigated as part of the concept of quality of working life.
Singh-Sengupta (1993) in her study observed that one of the most critical and
one of the least discussed elements in Quality of work life is the issue of power relations. In their
series of observations in a wide range of organizations the top management is suffering from
deficit of power as the non-managerial cadres amass all powers because of the strength of trade
unions and their numerical strength. The study disclosed that the two groups, managers and
workers seemed to be currently interdependent. Appropriate intervention programme may
change the relationship to co-operatively interdependent.
By correlating the Quality of Work life at Hindustan Machine Tools (HMT)
with special reference to its Jammu & Kashmir Unit, Gani and Ahmad (1995) examined the
empirical level of various components of QWL from their theoretical expositions. The study was
carried out by personal interviews of the workers there. The results of the study are (i) the
existing QWL in the organization under study is of an average standard (ii) compared to working
environment, rational and job factors, the financial factors present a dismal picture (iii) the
absence of participative management culture, has given rise to harder beaurocratic controls,
which has eroded creativity initiative and innovative capabilities of excellent performers.
In an attempt to establish an inevitable linkage between the Quality of Work
Life and the industrial relations processes, Mankidy (2000) observes that the more positive the
Industrial relations processes, the greater the possibility of improved Quality of Work Life.
Positive Industrial Relations should ensure better wages, flexible hours of work, conducive work
29
environment, employment benefits, career prospects, job satisfaction, meaningful employee
involvement in decision making etc. leading to better Quality of Work Life. The study concluded
that the improved Quality of Work Life will naturally help to improve the family life of the
employees and would also improve the performance of the organization.
Sirgy et al.; (2001) suggested that the key factors in quality of working life
are: Need satisfaction based on job requirements, Need satisfaction based on Work environment,
Need satisfaction based on Supervisory behaviour, Need satisfaction based on Ancillary
programmes, Organizational commitment. They defined quality of working life as satisfaction of
these key needs through resources, activities, and outcomes stemming from participation in the
workplace. Maslow’s needs were seen as relevant in underpinning this model, covering Health &
safety, Economic and family, Social, Esteem, Actualization, Knowledge and Aesthetics,
although the relevance of non-work aspects is play down as attention is focused on Quality of
work life rather than the broader concept of quality of life.
Ellis and Pompli (2002) identified a number of factors contributing to job
dissatisfaction and quality of working life in nurses, including: Poor working environments,
Resident aggression, Workload, Unable to deliver quality of care preferred, Balance of work and
family, Shift work, Lack of involvement in decision making, Professional isolation, Lack of
recognition, Poor relationships with supervisor/peers, Role conflict, Lack of opportunity to learn
new skills.
Bearfield, (2003) used 16 questions to examine quality of working life, and
distinguished between causes of dissatisfaction in professionals, intermediate clerical, sales and
service workers, indicating that different concerns might have to be addressed for different
groups.
The Study on Singaporean Employees development, Cheng S says in a high
Quality of work life there should be a positive impact on personal life, an opportunity to be
involved in decision as well as an acceptable level of physical comfort. Jobs seen to exist within
30
high Quality of work life work situations are those in which there is minimal negative impact on
one’s personal life, and hopefully one which has a positive impact on one’s personal life.
Cheng S in his paper Quality of work life through employee participation in
Singapore has discussed the following four different approaches to Quality of work life
Employee share option scheme, Joint management consultation, Quality circle and Industrial
relations circle.
National Seminar on improving the quality of working life (1982) was
convened to enquire into the direction of Quality of Work Life activities in India and prepare an
action plan for implementing the Quality of Work Life concepts. The recommendation from the
National seminar published in the Journal of Productivity (1982) states that at the enterprise
level, improvement of quality of work life should be through the co-operative endeavor between
Management and unions. The conference pointed out that the Government could help in
improving Quality of Work Life through legislation, executive policy and action through its
entrepreneurial role in the public sector recommended the need for engaging and involving staff
in the management and policy decisions for improvement in Quality of Work Life.
31
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
Research methodology is a way to systematically solve the research problem. It may be
understood as a science of studying how research is done scientifically. The scope of research
methodology is wider than that of research methods. This chapter states the Methodology
adapted for the study by the researcher.
32
This chapter deals with the methodology adopted for the study by the researcher. It
includes Title, significance of the study, statement of the problem, aims and objectives, research
hypothesis, research design, tools for data collection, statistical testing, definitions, limitation of
the study, chapterisation of the study.
Title of the Project:
The Research was done on the topic “A STUDY ON QUALITY OF WORK LIFE”
at Pest Control India Pvt. Ltd.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY:
Quality of work life covers various aspects under the general umbrella of supportive
organizational behavior. Thus, the Quality of work life should be broad in its scope. It must be to
evaluate the attitude of the employees towards the personnel policies. The research will be
helpful in understanding the current position of the respective company. And provide some
strategies to extent the employee’s satisfaction with little modification which is based on the
internal facilities of the company.
The purpose of this study was to explore to experience of workers towards their Quality
of work life and their work environment in terms of stress, perception of employee, relationship
between co-workers, work load, time pressure and work-balance etc.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM:
The aim of the study includes the following factors towards the quality of Work
life. They are such as poor working condition environments, resident aggression, balance of
work and family, work load, inability to deliver quality of care preferred, shift timing, lack of
involvement in work process and decision –making, poor relationship between supervisor/ Team
Leader, role conflict, lack of recognitions and lack of opportunity to learn new skills.
33
Training is important areas were the workers can utilize for their self development
and updating of their work knowledge. Ultimately every effort that the management takes for the
worker and perseverance of the worker on their physical and the mental well being inside the
organization that help in maintaining their motivation and satisfaction level which is important
for effective performance of any worker. Thus the present study is an attempt describing their
factors as a tool to access the Quality of work life of the employees.
AIM:
To study the QUALITY OF WORK LIFE of the employees at SALEM STEEL
PLANT.
OBJECTIVES:
To study the Socio-demographic details of the employees respondents.
To study the perception level of employees to determine the Quality of work life of the
Employees.
To study the Social Relevance with work life pattern of the employees at Pest Control
India Pvt. Ltd.
To study the balance between the work and Home life of the employees.
To study the overall Quality of work life of employees at Pest Control India Pvt. Ltd.
RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS:
There is a significant difference between the departments of the respondents with regard
to various dimension of QWL.
There is a significant difference between the sex of the respondents with regard to various
dimension of QWL.
There is a significant difference between the marital status with regard to overall QWL.
There is a significant difference among the designation of the respondents with regard to
various dimension of QWL.
34
There is a significant relationship between the age of the respondents with regard to
overall dimensions of QWL.
There is a significant relationship between the experiences of the respondents with regard
to overall QWL.
RESEARCH DESIGN:
“A research design is the 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”.
The researcher used Descriptive research design, because it helps to describe a
particular situation prevailing within a company. Descriptive study was necessary to ensure the
complete interpretation of the situation and to ensure minimum bias in the collection of data.
PILOT STUDY:
The purpose behind the pilot study was to find out the feasibility and suitability of
the study and to formulate the problem more specifically. The researcher carried out the pilot
study and realized the need for study.
PRE-TEST:
The researcher tested the questionnaire with 5 respondents and checked the
suitability and aptness of the questionnaire. The necessary changes were made at the end of pre-
testing .The questionnaire is enclosed in the appendix.
SAMPLE DESIGN:
UNIVERSE: The universe constituted the various Departments includes Marketing, Product Sales,
Service, Quality Assurance, Customer Care, Accounts & Administration and Finance
Department. The total no. of employees of the above mentioned departments are 100.
SAMPLE SIZE:
35
For a research study to be perfect the sample size selected should be optimal i.e. it
should neither be excessively large nor too small. Hence the sample size selected for the study
was 50 employees of “Pest Control India Pvt. Ltd”.
SAMPLE METHOD:
The researcher used Probability Sampling method. The data was collected using
Simple Random method through Lottery method.
RELIABILITY OF THE SCALE:
The reliability of the scale is 0.689, alpha value.
TOOLS FOR DATA COLLECTION:
The researcher used a standard questionnaire on Quality of work life(1999) was
developed including all 8 dimensions basic major factors which were developed by Richard E.
Walton (1975) The first part deals with Socio-Demographic details and the second part deals
with the Dimensions.The dimensions of the question are as follows:
SL.NO QUALITY OF WORK LIFE DIMENSIONS TOTAL NO OF ITEMS1 Adequate and fair compensation 3
2 Safe and healthy working condition 5
3 Opportunities for Development 9
4 Opportunities for growth and security 5
5 Social Integration 6
6 Constitutionalism 4
7 Work and life space 3
8 Social relevance and working life 9
SCORING:The perception of the workers were measured by giving scores to each response as 5,4,3,2,1 as
instructed in the standard scale (i.e)
5- Strongly agree
4-Agree
3-undecided
36
2-disagree
1-Strongly Disagree
It indicates the increase the score, higher the quality of work life.
DATA COLLECTION:
The researcher distributed the questionnaire to the respondents and got the filled
up questionnaire after a week for the staffs at Managerial level. The researcher used interview
schedule to collect the responses of the questionnaire from the technicians.
STATISTICAL TESTING: The researcher converted the data into tables To analyze the data, The statistical
data namely karl-pearson’s co-efficient of correlation was used to find out the relationship
between two variables, student‘t’ test was used to find out the difference two groups and one
way analysis of variance was used to find out the variance between the groups and within the
groups.
DATA COLLECTION METHOD:
Both the Primary and Secondary data collection method were used in the
project. First time collected data are referred to as primary data. In this research the primary data
was collected by means of a Structured Questionnaire. Data which has already gone through
the process of analysis or were used by someone else earlier is referred to secondary data. This
type of data was collected from the books, journals, company records etc.
DEFINITION
CONCEPTUAL DEFINITION:
Quality of work life
It refers to the physical and mental well being of the workers in their work life is
studied through the determinants of QWL like adequate and fair compensation, safe and healthy
37
working condition, opportunities for development, opportunities for growth and security, social
integration, constitutionalism, work and life space, social relevance and working life.
OPERATIONAL DEFINITION:
Adequate and fair compensation:
It is a just and equitable balance between effort and reward. The compensation should help the
employee in maintaining a socially desirable standard of living.
Safe and healthy working conditions:
Quality of work cannot be high unless the work environment is free from all hazards detrimental
to the health and safety of employees. Reasonable hours of work, cleanliness, pollution free
atmosphere, risk free work, etc are the main elements of a good physical environment for work.
Opportunity to use and develop human capacities:
The job should contain sufficient variety of tasks to provide challenge and to ensure the
utilization of talents. Today work has repetitive and mechanical so that the worker has little
control on it. Quality of work life can be improved if the job allows sufficient autonomy and
control, provides timely feedback on performance and uses a wide range of skills.
Opportunity for career growth:
Opportunities for promotions are limited in case of all categories of employees either due to
educational barriers or due to limited openings at the higher level. QWL provides future
opportunity for continued growth and security by expanding one’s capabilities, knowledge and
qualifications.
Social integration in work force:
The worker should be made to feel a sense of identity with the organization and develop a
feeling of self-esteem. Openness, trust, sense of community feeling, scope for upward mobility,
equitable treatment is essential for its purpose.
38
Constitutionalisation in the work organization:
QWL provides constitutional protection to the employees only to the level of desirability as it
hampers workers. It happens because the management’s action is challenged in every action and
bureaucratic procedures need to be followed lat that level. Constitutional protection is provided
to employees on such matters as privacy, free speech, equity and due process.
Work and personal life:
There should be proper balance between work life and personal life of employees. The demands
of work such as late hours, frequent travel, and quick transfers are both psychologically and
socially very costly and detrimental to quality of work life.
Social relevance of works:
QWL is concerned about the establishment of social relevance to work in a socially beneficial
manner. The worker’s self esteem would be high if his work is useful to the society and the vice
versa is also true.
LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY:
Converting qualitative data into quantitative data may often lead to inaccurate results.
The respondents may not have expressed them strong negative feelings about the
policies, which results in the error of central tendency.
Few respondents were reluctant while answering the questions.
PROBLEM ENCOUNTERED BY THE RESEARCHER:
Being a service oriented industry, matching time with technicians was a constraint.
CHAPTERISATION:
Chapter 1:- Introduction of the topic and organizational profile.
Chapter 2:- It deals with review of literature.
Chapter 3:- This chapter presents the research methodology.
Chapter 4:- It deals with Analysis and interpretation.
39
Chapter 5:- This chapter deals with findings, suggestion and conclusion.
40
CHAPTER IV
DATA ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION
Table 1
DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY AGE GROUP
S. No. Age Group No. of Respondents Percentage
41
1 24 to 32 Years 21 42.0
2 33 to 40 Years 11 22.0
3 41 to 48 Years 10 20.0
4 Above 48 Years 8 16.0
INFERENCE:
The above table indicates that nearly half of the respondents (42%) belong to the
age group of 24-32 years, while nearly one fourth of the respondents (22%) belong to the age
group of 33-40 years, nearly 20% of the respondents belong to the age group of 41-48 years &
rest of the respondents (16%) belong to the age group of above 48 years.
42%
22%
20%
16%
AGE GROUP24 to 32 Years 33 to 40 Years 41 to 48 Years Above 48 Years
Table 2
DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY MARITAL STATUS
S. No. Marital Status No. of Respondents Percentage
1 Married 41 82.0
2 Unmarried 9 18.0
42
INFERENCE:
The above table shows that vast majority of the respondents (82%) were married,
and 18 % of the respondents were unmarried.
married82%
un-married18%
Marital Status
Table 3
DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY SEX
S. No. Sex No. of Respondents Percentage
1 Male 46 92.0
43
2 Female 4 8.0
INFERENCE:
The above table shows that vast majority of the respondents (92%) were Male,
rest of the respondents (8% ) were Female.
Male92%
Female8%
Sex
Table 4
DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY DESIGNATION
S. No. Designation No. of Respondents Percentage
1 Manager 10 20.0
44
2 Officer 8 16.0
3 Executive 12 24.0
4 Technician 20 40.0
INFERENCE:
The above table indicates that nearly half of the respondents (40%) were Technicians, one third of
the respondents (36%) were officers, one fourth of the respondents (24%) were Executives, & rest of the
respondents (20%) were Managers.
Manager20%
Officer16%
Executive24%
Technician40%
Designation
Table 5DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY DEPARTMENT CLASSIFICATION
S. No. Department
ClassificationNo. of Respondents Percentage
45
1 Technical 34 68.0
2 Non-Technical 16 32.0
INFERENCE: The above table shows that more than half of the respondents
(68%) belong to Technical department and rest of respondents (32%) belong to Non-
technical department.
Non-Technical
32%
(Tech-nical)68%
RESPONDENTS CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO DEPARTMENT
Table 6
DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY EXPERIENCE
S. No. Experience No. of Respondents Percentage
46
1 Upto 5 years 23 46.0
2 6-10 years 7 14.0
3 11-15 years 3 6.0
4 16-20 years 8 16.0
5 21-25 years 5 10.0
6 Above 25 years 4 8.0
INFERENCE:
The above table shows that nearly half of the respondents (48%) have experience
up to 5 years, nearly one third of the respondents (16%) have experience between 16 and 20
years, 14% of respondents have experience between 6 and 10 years, 10% of the respondents have
experience between 21 and 25 years, 8% of the respondents have experience above 25 years and
rest of the respondents (6%) are experienced between 11 and 15 years.
Upto 5 years6-10 years
11-15 years16-20 years
21-25 yearsAbove 25 years
46
14
616
108
EXPERIENCE OF THE RESPONDENTS
Table 7DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY THEIR LEVEL OF QUALITY OF WORK
LIFES. Level of Quality of Work Life No. of Respondents Percentage
47
No. (n:50)
A Level of Adequate & Fair Compensation1 Low Level 45 90.0
2 High Level 5 10.0B Level of Safe & Healthy Working Condition1 Low Level 36 72.02 High Level 14 28.0C Level of Opportunities for Development1 Low Level 30 60.02 High Level 20 40.0D Level of Opportunity for Growth & Security
1 Low Level 28 56.02 High Level 22 44.0E Level of Social Integration
1 Low Level 45 90.02 High Level 5 10.0F Level of Constitutionalism1 Low Level 34 68.02 High Level 16 32.0G Level of work & Life Space
1 Low Level 32 64.02 High Level 18 36.0H Level of Social Relevance & Work Life1 Low Level 28 56.02 High Level 22 44.0I Level of Overall Quality of Work Life1 Low Level 26 52.02 High Level
24 48.0
48
INFERENCE: TABLE-7
A. Majority of the respondents (90%) have low level of Quality of work life due to
Inadequate and Unfair Compensation.
B. Majority of the respondents (72%) have low level of Quality of work life due to Unsafe &
Unhealthy working condition.
C. Majority of the respondents (60%) have low level of Quality of work life due to lack of
Opportunities for development.
D. Majority of the respondents (56%) have low level of Quality of work life due to lack of
Opportunities for growth and security.
E. Majority of the respondents (90%) have low level of Quality of work life due to low level of
Social Integration.
F. More than half of the respondents (68%) have low level of Quality of work life due to lack
of Constitutionalism.
G. More than half of the respondents (64%) have low level of Quality of work life in terms of
Work & life space.
H. More than half of the respondents (56%) have low level of Quality of work life in terms of
Social relevance & work life.
I. More than half of the respondents (52%) have low level of Overall quality of work life.
49
Table 8‘t’ TEST BETWEEN THE RESPONDENTS MARITAL STATUS WITH REGARD TO
QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
S. No
Marital Status N MeanStd.
DeviationStatisticalInference
1 Level of Adequate & Fair Compensation t=2.309df=48P<0.05
Significant
Married 41 12.20 1.83
Unmarried 9 10.56 2.35
2 Level of Safe & Healthy Working Condition t=0.568df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Married 41 20.54 2.04
Unmarried 9 20.11 2.03
3 Level of Opportunities for Development t=1.392df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Married 41 35.80 2.78
Unmarried 9 34.22 4.32
4 Level of Opportunity for Growth & Security t=1.669df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Married 41 18.66 1.96
Unmarried 9 17.33 2.96
5 Level of Social Integration t=-1.498df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Married 41 25.56 3.16
Unmarried 9 27.22 2.11
6 Level of Constitutionalism t=-0.224df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Married 41 15.80 2.32
Unmarried 9 16.00 2.60
7 Level of work & Life Space t=0.618df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Married 41 11.88 1.40
Unmarried 9 11.56 1.51
8 Level of Social Relevance & Work Life t=0.189
50
df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Married 41 37.24 3.50
Unmarried 9 37.00 3.57
9 Level of Overall Quality of Work Life t=0.945df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Married 41 177.68 9.80
Unmarried 9 174.00 13.86
INFERENCE:
There is a significant difference between the marital status of the respondents with
regard to various dimension level of Adequate income and Fair Compensation. There is no
significant difference between the marital status of the respondents with regard to the different
dimension level of Safe and Healthy Working condition, Opportunities for development,
Opportunities for growth & security, Social Integration, Constitutionalism, Work & life space,
Social relevance & work life & Overall quality of work life.
Table 9
51
‘t’ TEST BETWEEN THE RESPONDENTS SEX WITH REGARD TO QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
S. No
Sex N MeanStd.
DeviationStatisticalInference
1 Level of Adequate & Fair Compensation t=-1.143df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Male 46 11.80 2.07
Female 4 13.00 0.00
2 Level of Safe & Healthy Working Condition t=1.526df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Male 46 20.59 2.04
Female 4 19.00 1.15
3 Level of Opportunities for Development t=-1.689df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Male 46 35.30 3.14
Female 4 38.00 1.41
4 Level of Opportunity for Growth & Security t=-2.589df=48P>0.05
Significant
Male 46 18.20 2.15
Female 4 21.00 0.00
5 Level of Social Integration t=-1.480df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Male 46 25.67 3.11
Female 4 28.00 0.00
6 Level of Constitutionalism t=-0.141df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Male 46 15.83 2.44
Female 4 16.00 0.00
7 Level of work & Life Space t=-0.264df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Male 46 11.80 1.47
Female 4 12.00 0.00
8 Level of Social Relevance & Work Life t=0.119df=48
Male 46 37.22 3.63
52
P>0.05Not Significant
Female 4 37.00 0.00
9 Level of Overall Quality of Work Life t=-1.389df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Male 46 176.41 10.80
Female 4 184.00 2.45
INFERENCE:
There is a significant difference between the male & female of the respondents with
regard to various dimension level of Opportunities for growth & security. There is no significant
difference between the male & female of the respondents with regard to the different dimension
level of Adequate income and Fair Compensation Safe and Healthy Working condition,
Opportunities for development, Social Integration, Constitutionalism, Work & life space, Social
relevance & work life & Overall quality of work life.
Table10
53
‘t’ TEST BETWEEN THE RESPONDENTS DEPARTMENT WITH REGARD TO QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
S. No
Marital Status N MeanStd.
DeviationStatisticalInference
1 Level of Adequate & Fair Compensation t=0.659df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Technical 34 12.03 1.83
Non-Technical 16 11.63 2.39
2 Level of Safe & Healthy Working Condition t=1.738df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Technical 34 20.79 1.97
Non-Technical 16 19.75 2.02
3 Level of Opportunities for Development t=-1.039df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Technical 34 35.21 3.25
Non-Technical 16 36.19 2.79
4 Level of Opportunity for Growth & Security t=-2.034df=48P<0.05
Significant
Technical 34 18.00 2.22
Non-Technical 16 19.31 1.92
5 Level of Social Integration t=-0.220df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Technical 34 25.79 2.89
Non-Technical 16 26.00 3.46
6 Level of Constitutionalism t=-0.200df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Technical 34 15.79 2.52
Non-Technical 16 15.94 1.98
7 Level of work & Life Space t=-0.832df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Technical 34 11.71 1.59
Non-Technical 16 12.06 .93
8 Level of Social Relevance & Work Life t=-0.069df=48
Technical 34 37.18 3.84
54
P>0.05Not Significant
Non-Technical 16 37.25 2.65
9 Level of Overall Quality of Work Life t=-0.503df=48P>0.05
Not Significant
Technical 34 176.50 11.44
Non-Technical 16 178.13 8.69
INFERENCE:
There is a significant difference between the respondents’ Department with regard to
various dimension level of Opportunities for growth & security. There is no significant difference
between the male & female of the respondents with regard to the different dimension level of
Adequate income and Fair Compensation Safe and Healthy Working condition, Opportunities for
development, Social Integration, Constitutionalism, Work & life space, Social relevance & work life
& Overall quality of work life.
55
Table 11ONE WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE AMONG DESIGNATION OF THE
RESPONDENTS WITH REGARD TO QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
S.No
Designation SS df MSMean
Sig.
1 Level of Adequate & Fair Compensation
F= 1.748P>0.05
Not Significant
Between Groups 20.308 3 6.769 G1=11.90G2=12.63G3=10.83 G4=12.25
Within Groups 178.19246
3.874
2 Level of Safe & Healthy Working Condition
F= 1.043P>0.05
Not Significant
Between Groups 12.770 3 4.257 G1=20.80G2=20.00G3= 19.75G4=20.90
Within Groups 187.65046
4.079
3 Level of Opportunities for Development
F= 1.454P>0.05
Not Significant
Between Groups 41.280 3 13.760 G1=36.40G2=37.00G3=34.50G4= 35.10
Within Groups 435.20046
9.461
4 Level of Opportunity for Growth & Security
F= 1.325P>0.05
Not Significant
Between Groups 18.788 3 6.263 G1=19.10G2=19.38G3=17.83G4= 18.05
Within Groups 217.39246
4.726
5 Level of Social Integration
F= 4.155P<0.05
Significant
Between Groups 97.228 3 32.409 G1=23.50G2=26.38G3=27.67G4= 25.75
Within Groups 358.79246
7.800
6 Level of ConstitutionalismF= 0.680P>0.05
Not Significant
Between Groups 11.403 3 3.801 G1=15.70G2=16.75G3=16.08Within Groups 257.317 4 5.594
56
6 G4= 15.40
7 Level of work & Life Space
F=0.505P>0.05
Not Significant
Between Groups 3.105 3 1.035 G1=11.80G2=12.38G3=11.75G4= 11.65
Within Groups 94.27546
2.049
8 Level of Social Relevance & Work Life
F=0.273 P>0.05
Not Significant
Between Groups 10.350 3 3.450 G1=37.70G2=37.50G3=37.50G4= 36.65
Within Groups 581.65046
12.645
9 Level of Overall Quality of Work Life
F=0.719 P>0.05
Not Significant
Between Groups 245.413 3 81.804 G1=176.90G2=182.00G3=175.92G4=175.75
Within Groups 5235.56746
113.817
G1=Manager G2=Officer G3=Executive G4=Technician
INFERENCE:
There is a significant difference among the Designation of the respondents with
regard to various dimension level of Social Integration. There is no significant difference among the
Designation of the respondents with regard to the different dimension level of Adequate income and
Fair Compensation Safe and Healthy Working condition, Opportunities for growth & security
Opportunities for development, , Constitutionalism, Work & life space, Social relevance & work life
& Overall quality of work life.
57
Table 12KARL PEARSON’S COEFFICIENT OF CORRELATION BETWEEN RESPONDENTS’
AGE AND VARIOUS ASPECTS OF QUUALITY OF WORK LIFE
S.No.
AgeCorrelatio
n ValueStatistical Inference
1.Age Vs Adequate & fair compensation
.368P<0.01
Highly Significant
2.Age Vs Safe & healthy Working Conditions
-.049P>0.05
Not Significant
3.Age Vs Opportunities for development
.175P>0.05
Not Significant
4.Age Vs Opportunities for growth & Security
.294P<0.05
Significant
5.Age Vs Social Integration
-.274P>0.05
Not Significant
6Age VsConstitutionalism
.024P>0.05
Not Significant
7Age Vs Work & life Space
.263P>0.05
Not Significant
8Age VsSocial relevance & working Life
.213P>0.05
Not Significant
9Age Vs Quality of Work life
.204P>0.05
Not Significant
INFERENCE:
There is a highly significant relationship between the Age of the respondents with
regard to level of Adequate income and Fair Compensation. There is a significant relationship
between the Age of the respondents with regard to level of Opportunities for growth & security.
There is no significant relationship between the Age of the respondents with regard to the different
dimension level of Safe and Healthy Working condition, Opportunities for development, Social
Integration, Constitutionalism, Work & life space, Social relevance & work life & Overall quality of
work life.
Table 13
58
KARL PEARSON’S COEFFICIENT OF CORRELATION BETWEEN RESPONDENTS’EXPERIENCE AND VARIOUS ASPECTS OF QUUALITY OF WORK
LIFE
S.No.
ExperienceCorrelatio
n ValueStatistical Inference
1.Experience Vs Adequate & fair compensation
.355P<0.05
Significant
2.Experience Vs Safe & healthy Working Conditions
-.111P>0.05
Not Significant
3.Experience Vs Opportunities for development
.174P>0.05
Not Significant
4.Experience Vs Opportunities for growth & Security
.315P<0.05
Significant
5.Experience Vs Social Integration
-.113P>0.05
Not Significant
6Experience Vs Constitutionalism
.139P>0.05
Not Significant
7Experience Vs Work & life Space
.299P<0.05
Significant
8Experience Vs Social relevance & working Life
.285P<0.05
Significant
9Experience Vs Quality of Work life
.295P<0.05
Significant
INFERENCE:
There is a significant relationship between the experience of the respondents with
regard to various dimensions of level of Adequate income and Fair Compensation, Opportunities for
growth & security, Work & life space, Social relevance & work life & quality of work life. There is
no significant relationship between the experience of the respondents with regard to the different
dimensions of level of Safe and Healthy Working condition, Opportunities for development, Social
Integration & Constitutionalism.
59
CHAPTER – V
60
FINDINGS, SUGGESTIONS & CONCLUSION MAJOR FINDINGS:
Nearly half of the respondents (42%) belong to the age group of 24-32 years.
Vast majority of the respondents (82%) were married.
Vast majority of the respondents (92%) were Male.
Nearly half of the respondents (40%) were Technicians.
More than half of the respondents (68%) belong to Technical department.
Nearly half of the respondents (48%) have experience up to 5 years.
FINDINGS RELATED TO RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS:
RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS: 1
There is significant difference between marital status of the respondents with
regard to various dimensions of quality of work life.
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is no significant difference between marital status with regard to overall
quality of work life.
STATISTICAL TEST APPLIED:
T-test has been applied for this analysis.
FINDINGS:
There is no significant difference between marital status with regard to overall
quality of work life. Hence Null Hypothesis is accepted.
RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS: 2
61
There is significant difference between the sex of the respondents with regard
to various dimensions quality of work life.
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is no significant difference between the sex of the respondents with
regard to various dimensions quality of work life.
STATISTICAL TEST APPLIED:
T-test has been applied for this analysis.
FINDINGS:
There is no significant difference between the sex of the respondents with
regard to various dimensions quality of work life. Hence Null Hypothesis is accepted.
RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS: 3
There is significant difference between the Departments of the respondents
with regard to various dimensions quality of work life.
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is no significant difference between the Departments of the
respondents with regard to various dimensions quality of work life.
STATISTICAL TEST APPLIED:
T-test has been applied for this analysis.
FINDINGS:
There is no significant difference between the Departments of the respondents
with regard to various dimensions quality of work life. Hence Null Hypothesis is accepted.
RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS: 4
62
There is significant difference among the designation of the respondents with
regard to various dimensions quality of work life.
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is no significant difference among the designation of the respondents
with regard to various dimensions quality of work life.
STATISTICAL TEST APPLIED:
F-test has been applied for this analysis.
FINDINGS:
There is no significant difference among the designation of the respondents
with regard to various dimensions quality of work life. Hence Null Hypothesis is accepted.
RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS: 5
There is significant relationship between the age of the respondents with regard
to overall dimensions quality of work life.
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is no significant relationship between the age of the respondents with
regard to overall dimensions quality of work life.
STATISTICAL TEST APPLIED:
Karl Pearson’s correlation test has been applied for this analysis.
FINDINGS:
There is no significant relationship between the age of the respondents with
regard to overall dimensions quality of work life. Hence Null Hypothesis is accepted.
RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS: 6
63
There is a significant relationship between the experience of the respondents
with regard to overall dimensions of quality of work life.
NULL HYPOTHESIS:
There is a significant relationship between the experience of the respondents
with regard to overall dimensions of quality of work life.
STATISTICAL TEST APPLIED:
Karl Pearson’s correlation test has been applied for this analysis.
FINDINGS:
There is a significant relationship between the experience of the respondents
with regard to overall dimensions of quality of work life. Hence Null Hypothesis is rejected.
SUGGESTIONS
64
The employees of Pest Control India Pvt. Ltd. may be provided with the following from
the Company.
o Improvement in rewarding and awarding policies.
o Introduction of Promotion policy at operation level
Improving good relationship with employees and providing friendly environment in the
organization.
The Company may establish career development systems.
Employees may be given high motivation from the top management of the Company.
All employees may be given more compensation, in the form of incentives from the
Company as a token of recognition of high achievers.
Employees may be given special training from the Company related to their job during
working period.
The Company has to measure the quality of work life periodically.
CONCLUSION
65
From the study it is clear that Quality of work life of employees in Pest Control
India Pvt. Ltd is good. This research highlights some of the small gaps in employee’s
satisfaction towards the Company.
The Quality Mission should include not only the quality of products; but also the
quality of work life of the employees. Quality of work life can be improved upon by having good
supervision, good working conditions, good pay and benefits, an interesting and challenging, and
a rewarding job, more positive the Industrial relations processes, the greater the possibility of
improved Quality of Work Life. Positive Industrial Relations should ensure better wages,
flexible hours of work, conducive work environment, employment benefits, career prospects, job
satisfaction, and meaningful employee involvement in decision making etc. ultimately leads to
better Quality of Work Life. Since the employees are the backbone of the company, the company
should satisfy them in order to improve the business in higher competitive market of the
liberalized economy considering the above mentioned factors.
66
ANNEXURE
67
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. K. Aswathappa (1997), “Human Resources and Personal Management” Tata
Mcgraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, New Delhi – 110 001.
2. John M. Ivancevich (2003), “Human Resources and Personal Management” Tata
Mcgraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, New Delhi – 110 001.
3. C. R. Kothari (2001) “Research Methodology” of Wishwa Prakashan Publishing,
Chennai – 17, Edition
4. C. B. Mamoria and S. V. Gankar (2001), “Personnel Management Text &
Cases”, Himalaya Publishing house Mumbai, XXI Edition.
5. Biswaject pattanayak (2001), “Human Resources and Personal Management”
Prentice Hall of India Pvt., Ltd. New Delhi.
6. Biswaject pattanayak (2001), “Human Resources and Personal Management”
Prentice Hall of India Pvt., Ltd. New Delhi.
7. “Quality of Work Life”, Lee M. Ozley and Judith S. Ball, HUMAN RESOURCES
MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT HANDBOOK, edited by William R.
Tracey, Ed. D., AMACOM, 1985.
8. Wozner, Y. (1982). Assessing the quality of internal life. Human Relations, vol. 35
(11): 1059-1072
9. Lau, R.S.M., and B.E. May. "A Win-Win Paradigm for Quality of Work Life and
Business Performance." Human Resource Development Quarterly 9, no. 3
(1998): 211–226.
10. Cole, J. "Building Heart and Soul: Increased Employer Concern for Employees."
I would be obliged if you fill in the questionnaire for the study. I promise that the data given by you will be kept confidential and will be used for academic purpose only. Please answer all the questions truly and objectively.
Personal Data
1. Age :
2. Marital Status : married unmarried
3. Sex : male Female
4. Designation :
5. Department :
6. Experience :
You are requested to tick any one of the following options.