CHAPTER IV

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS

DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES:

AGE OF THE RESPONDENTS

Q1: Age of the respondent

Cumulative
Age Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
20-30 48 96.0 96.0 96.0

30-40 2 4.0 4.0 100.0

Total 50 100.0 100.0

INTERPRETATION:

From the above table, it is inferred that 96 of the respondents were belong to the age group of 20 –
30, 4 of the respondents were belong to the age group of 30 – 40.

PIE-CHART
 GENDER OF THE RESPONDENTS

Q2: Gender of the respondent

Valid Cumulative
Gender Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Male 37 74.0 74.0 74.0
Female 13 26.0 26.0 100.0
Total 50 100.0 100.0

INTERPRETATION:

From the above table, it is inferred that 74 of the respondents were Male and 26 of the respondents
were Female.
 MARITAL STATUS OF THE RESPONDENTS

Q3: Marital status of the respondent

Valid Cumulative
Marital status Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Married 47 94.0 94.0 94.0
Unmarried 3 6.0 6.0 100.0

Total 50 100.0 100.0

INTERPRETATION:

From the above table, it is inferred that 94 of the respondents were Married and 6 of the
respondents were Unmarried.
EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATION OF THE RESPONDENTS

Q4: Educational Qualification

Educational Valid Cumulative
qualification Frequency Percent Percent Percent
SSLC 45 90.0 90.0 90.0
Hr. Sec 3 6.0 6.0 96.0
Diploma 2 4.0 4.0 100.0
Total 50 100.0 100.0

INTERPRETATION:

From the above table, it is inferred that 90 of the respondents were qualified SSLC and 6 of the
respondents were qualified Hr. Sec and 4% of the respondents were qualified diploma .
 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE OF THE RESPONDENTS

Q5: Years of Experience

Years of Valid Cumulative
experience Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Below2 2 4.0 4.0 4.0
2-4 47 94.0 94.0 98.0
4-6 1 2.0 2.0 100.0
Total 50 100.0 100.0

INTERPRETATION:

From the above table, it is inferred that 94 of the respondents fall under the category between 2 – 4
Years experience; 4 of the respondents fall under the category between below 2 Years experience; 2%
of the respondents fall under the category between 4 - 6 Years experience.
 MONTHLY INCOME OF THE RESPONDENTS

Q6:Monthly income of the respondent

Valid Cumulative
Monthly income Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Below 2 4.0 4.0 4.0
10000
10000- 47 94.0 94.0 98.0
15000
Above 1 2.0 2.0 100.0
20000
Total 50 100.0 100.0

INTERPRETATION:

From the above table, it is inferred that 94 of the respondents were belong to the income level of
below 10,000-15,000; 4 of the respondents were belong to the income level of below 10,000 ; 2 of
the respondents were belong to the income level of Above 20,000.
CORRELATION:

Comparison between the age of the respondents and their opinion

towards achieving through performance appraisal in the organization.

Correlations

Q10: In your opinion,

what does your
organization strive to
Q1: Age of the achieve through
respondent performance appraisal
Q1: Age of the Pearson Correlation 1 0.060
respondent

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.678

 N 50 50
Q10: In your opinion, Pearson Correlation 0.060 1
what does your
organization strive to
achieve through Sig. (2-tailed) 0.678
performance appraisal
N 50 50

INTERPRETATION:

From the above results it is revealed that the correlation value is greater than 0.50, which
signifies that there is a strong correlation between the variables, but the value is 0 to1 which
signifies that though the variables are strongly correlated it is a positive one. Thus it signifies that
the variables are positively correlated.

Comparison between the years of experience and the performance appraisal rating
method in the organization

Correlations

Q9: How would you

rate the performance
Q5: Years of appraisal method in
Experience your organization
Q5: Years of Pearson 1 -0.024
Experience Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.868

N 50 50

Q9: How would you Pearson -0.024 1

rate the performance Correlation
appraisal method in
your organization Sig. (2-tailed) 0.868

N 50 50
INTERPRETATION:

From the above results it is revealed that the correlation value is greater than 0.50, which
signifies that there is a strong correlation between the variables, but the value is 0 to1 which
signifies that it is negative one. Thus it signifies that the variables are strongly negatively
correlated.

CHI-SQUARE:

NULL HYPOTHESIS (H0):

There is no significant relationship between Gender and rating method of the

performance appraisal.

ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS (H1):

There is significant relationship between Gender and rating method of the

performance appraisal.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GENDER AND RATING METHOD OF THE PERFORMANCE

APPRAISAL

GENDER AND RATING METHOD OF THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL CROSSTABULATION

Q2: Gender of the respondent * Q9: How would you rate
the performance appraisal method in your organization
Cross tabulation

Q9: How would you rate

the performance appraisal
method in your organization
Easy Efficient Total
Q2: Gender of Male 3 34 37
the respondent
Female 1 12 13
Total 4 46 50

Chi-Square Tests

Asymptotic Exact Exact

Significance Sig. (2- Sig. (1-
Value df (2-sided) sided) sided)
Pearson .002a 1 0.962
Chi-Square

Continuity 0.000 1 1.000

Correctionb

Likelihood 0.002 1 0.962

Ratio
Fisher's 1.000 0.725
Exact Test
Linear-by- 0.002 1 0.962
Linear
Association

N of Valid 50
Cases
a. 2 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum
expected count is 1.04.
b. Computed only for a 2x2 table
INTERPRETATION:

p>0.05%

From the above table, it is inferred that there is no significant relationship between gender and rating
method of the performance appraisal , the null hypothesis is accepted.

NULL HYPOTHESIS (H0):

There is no significant relationship between Gender and frequent of the

performance appraisal carried out in the organization.

ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS (H1):

There is significant relationship between Gender and frequent of the performance

appraisal carried out in the organization.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GENDER AND FREQUENT OF THE PERFORMANCE

APPRAISAL CARRIED OUT IN THE ORGANIZATION

GENDER AND FREQUENT OF THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL CARRIED OUT IN THE

ORGANIZATION CROSSTABULATION:

Q2: Gender of the respondent * Q7: How often performance

appraisal carried out in your organization Cross tabulation
Q7: How often
performance appraisal
carried out in your
organization Total
 Very often Often
Q2: Gender Male Count 24 13 37
of the
respondent Expected 23.7 13.3 37.0
Count
Female Count 8 5 13
Expected 8.3 4.7 13.0
Count
Total Count 32 18 50
Expected 32.0 18.0 50.0
Count

Chi-Square Tests

Asymptotic
Significance Exact Sig. Exact Sig.
Value df (2-sided) (2-sided) (1-sided)
Pearson Chi- .046a 1 0.830
Square

Continuity 0.000 1 1.000

Correctionb

Likelihood 0.046 1 0.830

Ratio
Fisher's Exact 1.000 0.542
Test
Linear-by- 0.045 1 0.831
Linear
Association
 N of Valid 50
Cases
a. 1 cells (25.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 4.68.
b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

INTERPRETATION:

p>0.05%

From the above table, it is inferred that there is no significant relationship between gender and
Frequent of the performance appraisal carried out in the organization, the null hypothesis is accepted.

2ONE WAY ANOVA:

COMPARISON BETWEEN YEARS OF EXPERIENCE AND OPINION TOWARDS THE FAILURE OF

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

ANOVA
Q5: Years of Experience
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between 0.091 1 0.091 1.514 0.225
Groups
Within 2.889 48 0.060
Groups
Total 2.980 49

INTERPRETATION:

p>0.05%

From the above table, it is inferred that the significant level is greater than 0.05 hence, there is no
significant relationship between years of experience and opinion towards the failure of performance
appraisal, so the null hypothesis is accepted.

COMPARISON BETWEEN YEARS OF EXPERIENCE AND SATISFIED WITH (TOOLS)

UTILIZED IN THE ORGANIZATION:

 ANOVA

Q5: Years of Experience

Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups .020 2 .010 .159 .854

Within Groups 2.960 47 .063

Total 2.980 49

INTERPRETATION:

p>0.05%

From the above table, it is inferred that the significant level is greater than 0.05 hence, there is no
significant relationship between years of experience and satisfied towards tools utilized in the
organization, so the null hypothesis is accepted.

FINDINGS:

 96% of the respondents are belong to age group between 20-30.

 74% of the respondents are belong to gender of male.
 94% of the respondents are married.
 90% of the respondents have completed SSLC.
 94% of the respondents are between 2-4 years of experience.
 94%of the respondents are belong to the income level below 10,000-15,000.
 From Correlation, we come to know that there is a strong correlation between age and opinion
towards performance appraisal.
 From Correlation, we come to know that there is a strong correlation between years of
experience and rating method of performance appraisal.
 From chi-square, it is inferred that there is no significant relationship between gender and
rating method of the performance appraisal , the null hypothesis is accepted.
 From chi-square, it is inferred that there is no significant relationship between gender and
Frequent of the performance appraisal carried out in the organization, the null hypothesis is
accepted.
  From Anova, it is inferred that the significant level is greater than 0.05 hence, there is no
significant relationship between years of experience and opinion towards the failure of
performance appraisal, so the null hypothesis is accepted.
 From Anova, it is inferred that the significant level is greater than 0.05 hence, there is no
significant relationship between years of experience and satisfied towards tools utilized in the
organization, so the null hypothesis is accepted.

SUGGESTIONS:

 As per analysis all respondents are aware of about conducting performance appraisal in the
organization.

 The organization is only evaluating the production output(units) of the employee's performance,
the suggestion is that give more importance to the time parameter.

 The organization motive is to achieve the standard target through performance appraisal ,in
order to achieve the target, the organization should provide employee's certain training sessions
to identify their skills and potentials.

 The organization may take steps to communicate performance appraisal procedure in advance
to employees.

 Performance appraisal can developed in such a way to identify the hidden talent and skills of the
employee.

CONCLUSIONS:

The performance appraisal system is one of the most critical areas in the field of human
resource management. A sound appraisal system is, therefore, an individual asset in human
resource management.

Performance appraisal may be understood as the assessment of an individual’s performance in a

systematic way. Performance appraisal is able to identify the employee’s potential and find the
motivating factors of employees. It also helps in developing strength and rectifies weakness of the
employees.
 This research study helped the researcher to observe the organization level, formal procedures
used in the working organizations to evaluate personalities, contributions and potentials of employees.
Performance appraisal can be conducted more effectively by using the right tools and properly
reviewing and updating the performance appraisal program. If the suggested measures are taken into
consideration it will help to increase the effectiveness of performance appraisal system in the Ruby food
products private ltd.