CHAPTER- IV
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
CHAPTER- IV
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
TABLE 4.1
PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE
Preventative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
24 22.4 24.0 24.0
Highly Satisfied
Satisfied 20 18.7 20.0 44.0
Neutral 20 18.7 20.0 64.0
Valid
Dissatisfied 14 13.1 14.0 78.0
22 20.6 22.0 100.0
Highly dissatisfied
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.1
PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Preventative of employee are 24% of the respondents
are highly satisfied, 20% of the respondents satisfied, 20% of the respondents Neutral, 14%
of the respondents Dissatisfied, 22% of the respondents the highly dissatisfied.
TABLE 4.2
TOTAL PRODUCTIVE MAINTENANCE
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
24 22.4 24.0 24.0
Highly Satisfied
Satisfied 20 18.7 20.0 44.0
Neutral 15 14.0 15.0 59.0
Valid
Dissatisfied 12 11.2 12.0 71.0
29 27.1 29.0 100.0
Highly dissatisfied
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.2
TOTAL PRODUCTIVE MAINTENANCE
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the productive of employee are 24% of the respondents
are highly satisfied, 20% of the respondents satisfied, 15% of the respondents Neutral, 12%
of the respondents Dissatisfied, 29% of the respondents the highly dissatisfied.
TABLE 4.3
REDUCTION IN THE PRELIMINARY FINISHING TIME
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
16 15.0 16.0 16.0
Highly Satisfied
Satisfied 17 15.9 17.0 33.0
Neutral 22 20.6 22.0 55.0
Valid
Dissatisfied 15 14.0 15.0 70.0
30 28.0 30.0 100.0
Highly dissatisfied
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.3
REDUCTION IN THE PRELIMINARY FINISHING TIME
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the preliminary of employee are 16% of the respondents
are highly satisfied, 17% of the respondents satisfied, 22% of the respondents Neutral, 15%
of the respondents Dissatisfied, 30% of the respondents the highly dissatisfied.
TABLE 4.4
REDUCTION IN SERIES
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
18 16.8 18.0 18.0
Highly satisfied
Satisfied 16 15.0 16.0 34.0
Neutral 26 24.3 26.0 60.0
Valid
Dissatisfied 17 15.9 17.0 77.0
23 21.5 23.0 100.0
Highly dissatisfied
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.4
REDUCTION IN SERIES
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Series of employee are 18% of the respondents are
says that are highly satisfied, 16% of the respondents are says that satisfied, 26% of the
respondents are says that Neutral, 17% of the respondents are says that Dissatisfied, 23% of
the respondents are says that the highly dissatisfied.
TABLE 4.5
MANUFACTURING PLANT LAYOUT
Frequenc Percent Valid Cumulative
y Percent Percent
Highly satisfied 20 18.7 20.0 20.0
Satisfied 14 13.1 14.0 34.0
Neutral 25 23.4 25.0 59.0
Valid Dissatisfied 16 15.0 16.0 75.0
Highly 25 23.4 25.0 100.0
Dissatisfied
Total 100 93.5 100.0
Missing System 7 6.5
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.5
MANUFACTURING PLANT LAYOUT
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the plant Layout of employee are 20% of the respondents
are says that are highly satisfied, 14% of the respondents are says that satisfied, 25% of the
respondents are says that Neutral, 16% of the respondents are says that Dissatisfied, 25% of
the respondents are says that the highly dissatisfied.
TABLE 4.6
BALANCE OF WORKING PROCESS IN PRODUCTION
Workingprocess
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Highly satisfied 21 19.6 21.0 21.0
satisfied 16 15.0 16.0 37.0
Neutral 27 25.2 27.0 64.0
Valid
Dissatisfied 15 14.0 15.0 79.0
Highly dissatisfied 21 19.6 21.0 100.0
Total 100 93.5 100.0
Missing System 7 6.5
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.6
BALANCE OF WORKING PROCESS IN PRODUCTION
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the working process of employee are 21% of the
respondents are says that are highly satisfied, 16% of the respondents are says that satisfied,
27% of the respondents are says that Neutral, 15% of the respondents are says that
Dissatisfied, 21% of the respondents are says that the highly dissatisfied.
TABLE 4.7
TAKE OF TIME
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
23 21.5 23.0 23.0
Highly satisfied
satisfied 15 14.0 15.0 38.0
Neutral 18 16.8 18.0 56.0
Valid
Dissatisfied 16 15.0 16.0 72.0
28 26.2 28.0 100.0
Highly dissatisfied
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.7
TAKE OF TIME
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Talk time of employee are 23% of the respondents are
says that are highly satisfied, 15% of the respondents are says that satisfied, 18% of the
respondents are says that Neutral, 16% of the respondents are says that Dissatisfied, 28% of
the respondents are says that the highly dissatisfied.
TABLE 4.8
OVERALL EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCY
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
21 19.6 21.0 21.0
Highly satisfied
Satisfied 22 20.6 22.0 43.0
Neutral 18 16.8 18.0 61.0
Valid
Dissatisfied 16 15.0 16.0 77.0
23 21.5 23.0 100.0
Highky Dissatisfied
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.8
OVERALL EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCY
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Equipment of employee are 21% of the respondents
are says that are highly satisfied, 22% of the respondents are says that satisfied, 18% of the
respondents are says that Neutral, 16% of the respondents are says that Dissatisfied, 23% of
the respondents are says that the highly dissatisfied.
TABLE 4.9
DEMAND DRIVEN SUPPLY CHAIN
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
24 22.4 24.0 24.0
Highly Satisfied
Satisfied 17 15.9 17.0 41.0
Neutral 24 22.4 24.0 65.0
Valid
Dissatisfied 13 12.1 13.0 78.0
22 20.6 22.0 100.0
Highly Dissatisfied
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
\
CHART 4.9
DEMAND DRIVEN SUPPLY CHAIN
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Supply chain of employee are 24% of the respondents
are says that are highly satisfied, 17% of the respondents are says that satisfied, 24% of the
respondents are says that Neutral, 13% of the respondents are says that Dissatisfied, 22% of
the respondents are says that the highly dissatisfied.
TABLE 4.10
LEAN PROCUREMENT (CONVERSION OF RAW MATERIAL TO FINISHED
PRODUCT FOR DISTRIBUTION
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
19 17.8 19.0 19.0
Highly Satisfied
Satisfied 18 16.8 18.0 37.0
Neutral 30 28.0 30.0 67.0
Valid
Dissatisfied 17 15.9 17.0 84.0
16 15.0 16.0 100.0
Highly Dissatisfied
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.10
LEAN PROCUREMENT (CONVERSION OF RAW MATERIAL TO FINISHED
PRODUCT FOR DISTRIBUTION
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Procurement of employee are 19% of the respondents
are says that are highly satisfied, 18% of the respondents are says that satisfied, 30% of the
respondents are says that Neutral, 17% of the respondents are says that Dissatisfied, 16% of
the respondents are says that the highly dissatisfied.
TABLE 4.11
CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT CAN BE MAINTAINED
Kaizen
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Technology 30 28.0 30.0 30.0
Employees 25 23.4 25.0 55.0
Infrastructure 18 16.8 18.0 73.0
Valid
27 25.2 27.0 100.0
Health and safety
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.11
CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT CAN BE MAINTAINED
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Kaizen of employee are 30% of the respondents are
says that are technology, 25% of the respondents are says that Employee, 18% of the
respondents are says that Infrastructure, 17% of the respondents are says that Health and
Safety.
TABLE 4.12
REDUCING COST OF PRODUCTION
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
20 18.7 20.0 20.0
Not a reason
Neutral 19 17.8 19.0 39.0
Any other 20 18.7 20.0 59.0
Valid 17 15.9 17.0 76.0
Quality service
24 22.4 24.0 100.0
Major reason
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.12
REDUCING COST OF PRODUCTION
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Cost of Production of employee are 20% of the
respondents are says that are Not a reason, 19% of the respondents are says that Neutral,
20% of the respondents are says that Any other, 17% of the respondents are says that
Quality service, 24% of the respondents are says that the Major reason.
TABLE 4.13
ELIMINATING DEFECTS OF FINISHED PRODUCTS
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
19 17.8 19.0 19.0
Not a reason
Neutral 17 15.9 17.0 36.0
Any other 27 25.2 27.0 63.0
Valid 15 14.0 15.0 78.0
Quality service
22 20.6 22.0 100.0
Major reason
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.13
ELIMINATING DEFECTS OF FINISHED PRODUCTS
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Finished Products of employee are 19% of the
respondents are says that are Not a reason, 17% of the respondents are says that Neutral,
27% of the respondents are says that Any other, 15% of the respondents are says that
Quality service, 22% of the respondents are says that the Major reason.
TABLE 4.14
LONG TERM SURVIVAL OF FIRM WITH COMPETITORS
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
17 15.9 17.0 17.0
Not a reasom
Neutral 24 22.4 24.0 41.0
Any other 18 16.8 18.0 59.0
Valid 18 16.8 18.0 77.0
Quality service
23 21.5 23.0 100.0
Major reason
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.14
LONG TERM SURVIVAL OF FIRM WITH COMPETITORS
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Firm with Competitors of employee are 17% of the
respondents are says that are Not a reason, 24% of the respondents are says that Neutral,
18% of the respondents are says that Any other, 18% of the respondents are says that
Quality service, 23% of the respondents are says that the Major reason.
TABLE 4.15
REDUCE INVENTORY COST OF FIRM
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
23 21.5 23.0 23.0
Not a reason
Neutral 13 12.1 13.0 36.0
Any other 24 22.4 24.0 60.0
Valid 17 15.9 17.0 77.0
Quality Service
23 21.5 23.0 100.0
Major reason
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.15
REDUCE INVENTORY COST OF FIRM
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Reduce Inventory cost of employee are 23% of the
respondents are says that are Not a reason, 13% of the respondents are says that Neutral,
24% of the respondents are says that Any other, 17% of the respondents are says that
Quality service, 23% of the respondents are says that the Major reason.
TABLE 4.16
TRIMMING SUPPLY SIDE LEAD TIMES
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
22 20.6 22.0 22.0
Not a reason
Neutral 21 19.6 21.0 43.0
Any other 17 15.9 17.0 60.0
Valid 17 15.9 17.0 77.0
Quality service
23 21.5 23.0 100.0
Major reason
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.16
TRIMMING SUPPLY SIDE LEAD TIMES
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Trimming supply side lead Times of employee are
22% of the respondents are says that are Not a reason, 21% of the respondents are says that
Neutral, 17% of the respondents are says that Any other, 17% of the respondents are says
that Quality service, 23% of the respondents are says that the Major reason.
TABLE 4.17
REDUCING MATERIAL CONSUMPTION
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
21 19.6 21.0 21.0
Not a reason
Neutral 20 18.7 20.0 41.0
Any other 19 17.8 19.0 60.0
Valid 19 17.8 19.0 79.0
Quality service
21 19.6 21.0 100.0
Major reason
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.17
REDUCING MATERIAL CONSUMPTION
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Reducing Material Consumption of employee are 21%
of the respondents are says that are Not a reason, 20% of the respondents are says that
Neutral, 19% of the respondents are says that Any other, 19% of the respondents are says
that Quality service, 21% of the respondents are says that the Major reason.
TABLE 4.18
REDUCING DEMAND SIDE LEAD TIME
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
18 16.8 18.0 18.0
Not a reason
Neutral 20 18.7 20.0 38.0
Any other 21 19.6 21.0 59.0
Valid 18 16.8 18.0 77.0
Quality service
23 21.5 23.0 100.0
major reason
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.18
REDUCING DEMAND SIDE LEAD TIME
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Reducing Demand Side Lead time of employee are
18% of the respondents are says that are Not a reason, 20% of the respondents are says that
Neutral, 21% of the respondents are says that Any other, 18% of the respondents are says
that Quality service, 23% of the respondents are says that the Major reason.
TABLE 4.19
INCREASING PROFITABILITY OF FIRM
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
23 21.5 23.0 23.0
Not a reason
Neutral 22 20.6 22.0 45.0
Any other 13 12.1 13.0 58.0
Valid 21 19.6 21.0 79.0
Quality service
21 19.6 21.0 100.0
Major reason
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.19
INCREASING PROFITABILITY OF FIRM
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Increasing Profitability of firm of employee are 23%
of the respondents are says that are Not a reason, 22% of the respondents are says that
Neutral, 13% of the respondents are says that Any other, 21% of the respondents are says
that Quality service, 21% of the respondents are says that the Major reason.
TABLE 4.20
TO GAIN COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE I N MARKET
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
18 16.8 18.0 18.0
Not a reason
Neutral 19 17.8 19.0 37.0
Any other 21 19.6 21.0 58.0
Valid 17 15.9 17.0 75.0
Quality service
25 23.4 25.0 100.0
major reason
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.20
TO GAIN COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE I N MARKET
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Competitive Advantage in Market of employee are
18% of the respondents are says that are Not a reason, 19% of the respondents are says that
Neutral, 21% of the respondents are says that Any other, 17% of the respondents are says
that Quality service, 25% of the respondents are says that the Major reason.
TABLE 4.21
GREEN INITIATIVE OF ECOSYSTEM (RECYCLE, REUSE, REFUSE )
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
23 21.5 23.0 23.0
Not a reason
Neutral 17 15.9 17.0 40.0
any other 17 15.9 17.0 57.0
Valid 21 19.6 21.0 78.0
Quality Service
22 20.6 22.0 100.0
Major reason
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.21
GREEN INITIATIVE OF ECOSYSTEM (RECYCLE, REUSE, REFUSE )
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Green Initiative of Ecosystem of employee are 23% of
the respondents are says that are Not a reason, 17% of the respondents are says that Neutral,
17% of the respondents are says that Any other, 21% of the respondents are says that
Quality service, 22% of the respondents are says that the Major reason.
TABLE 4.22
UNFAIR TRADING PRACTICES
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
22 20.6 22.0 22.0
Not a reason
Neutral 15 14.0 15.0 37.0
Any other 23 21.5 23.0 60.0
Valid 17 15.9 17.0 77.0
Quality service
23 21.5 23.0 100.0
Major service
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.22
UNFAIR TRADING PRACTICES
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Unfair Trading Practices of employee are 22% of the
respondents are says that are Not a reason, 15% of the respondents are says that Neutral,
23% of the respondents are says that Any other, 17% of the respondents are says that
Quality service, 23% of the respondents are says that the Major reason.
TABLE 4.23
EMPLOYEE RETENTION
Employee
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Yes 53 49.5 53.0 53.0
Valid No 47 43.9 47.0 100.0
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.23
EMPLOYEE RETENTION
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Employee of employee are 53% of the respondents are
says that areyes , 47% of the respondents are says that No frequency.
TABLE 4.24
USAGE OF FINANCIAL RESOURCES
UsageOfFinancialResources
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Yes 51 47.7 51.0 51.0
Valid No 49 45.8 49.0 100.0
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.24
USAGE OF FINANCIAL RESOURCES
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Usage of financial resources of employee are 51% of
the respondents are says that are yes , 49% of the respondents are says that No frequency.
TABLE 4.25
IMPLEMENTATION OF ORGANIZATIONAL RULES, PROCEDURES AND
POLICIES
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Yes 55 51.4 55.0 55.0
Valid No 45 42.1 45.0 100.0
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.25
IMPLEMENTATION OF ORGANIZATIONAL RULES, PROCEDURES AND
POLICIES
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the implementation of Organization rules of employee are
55% of the respondents are says that areyes , 45% of the respondents are says that No
frequency.
TABLE 4.26
SATISFIED WITH THE SIZE OF THE FIRM
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Yes 48 44.9 48.0 48.0
Valid No 52 48.6 52.0 100.0
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.26
SATISFIED WITH THE SIZE OF THE FIRM
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Size of the Firm of employee are 53% of the
respondents are says that areyes , 47% of the respondents are says that No frequency.
TABLE 4.27
WHETHER TRADE UNIONS ARE NECESSARY FOR THE FIRM
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Yes 51 47.7 51.0 51.0
Valid No 49 45.8 49.0 100.0
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.27
WHETHER TRADE UNIONS ARE NECESSARY FOR THE FIRM
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Necessary for the Firm of employee are 53% of the
respondents are says that are yes, 47% of the respondents are says that No frequency.
TABLE 4.28
DO YOU FEEL LACK OF ROBUST &PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIPS WITH
SUPPLIERS
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Yes 51 47.7 51.0 51.0
Valid No 49 45.8 49.0 100.0
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.28
DO YOU FEEL LACK OF ROBUST &PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIPS WITH
SUPPLIERS
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the Professional Relation of employee are 51% of the
respondents are says that are yes , 49% of the respondents are says that No frequency.
TABLE 4.29
WOULD YOU CHANGE ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Yes 46 43.0 46.0 46.0
Valid No 54 50.5 54.0 100.0
Total 100 93.5 100.0
7 6.5
Missing System
Total 107 100.0
CHART 4.29
WOULD YOU CHANGE ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE
INTERPRETATION:
The above tables show that the change organization Structure of employee are 46% of
the respondents are says that areyes , 54% of the respondents are says that No frequency.
