CHAPTER IV EMPLOYEES’ JOB SATISFACTION - AN ANALYSIS …shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/18153/10/10_chapter4.pdf · CHAPTER IV EMPLOYEES’ JOB SATISFACTION - AN ANALYSIS

CHAPTER IV

EMPLOYEES’ JOB SATISFACTION - AN ANALYSIS ON PRE AND POST CORPORATISATION

This Chapter contains three parts. Part I deals with the socio economic profile

of the respondents. The Part II analyses the opinion of the respondents on their level

of satisfaction on their job and the Part III contains the multiple regression model

forming the predictor equations assuming the level of job satisfaction on pre and post

corporatization of DOT as dependent variable and its attributable Five main

variables.

Part - I: SOCIO ECONOMIC BACKGROUND OF THE EMPLOYEES

The socio-economic background of the employees of BSNL in Kerala Circle,

selected as sample respondents for knowing the job satisfaction level for the proper

functioning of the BSNL in Kerala circle, is illustrated here:

The parameters in socio-economic profile considered in it are: (1) Gender; (2)

Area of Work Place (3) Age; and (4) Educational Qualifications

1. Gender Composition

The gender is an important aspect for knowing the level of satisfaction of

employees and their satisfaction in their job. The composition of male and female

respondents in the sample selected from employees is given in Table 4.1.

233

Table 4.1

Gender wise Classification of Employees

Details of Employees’ Gender

District

Male Female Total

No Per centage No Per centage No Per centage

Thiruvananthapuram 60 32.43 65 34.21 125 33.33

Ernakulam 65 35.14 60 31.58 125 33.33

Kannur 60 32.43 65 34.21 125 33.33

Total 185 100.00 190 100.00 375 100.00

Source: primary data

As is seen from Table 4.1 that out of the 375 respondents in the Sample, 185

(49 per cent) are males spread over 32 per cent each (60 respondents) each in

Thiruvanathapuram and Kannur and the remaining 36 per cent (65 respondents) in

Ernakulam district, whereas 190 respondents (50 per cent) are from female category

spread in Thiruvananthapuram and Kannur (34 per cent) each and in Ernakulam 32

per cent. It is clear that the majority of the stakeholder respondents are from both the

categories but female respondents have a simple majority.

2. Area of Work Place

The area to which the respondents belong is an important criteria especially in

the case of technology driven items. In the case of knowing the satisfaction level of

respondents, 50 respondents each are selected from the rural population of three

districts viz. Thiruvananthapuram, Ernakulam and Kannur aggregating in all 150

respondents (40 per cent) and 75 respondents each from these three districts

representing urban population in aggregate 225 respondents (60 per cent). It is clear

234

from this, that a larger part of the respondents are from the urban area. The statistics is

given in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2

Area of work place wise classification of Employees

Details of Employees’ Area

District

Rural Urban Total

No. Per centage No. Per centage No. Per centage

Thiruvananthapuram 50 33.33 75 33.33 125 33.33

Ernakulam 50 33.33 75 33.33 125 33.33

Kannur 50 33.33 75 33.33 125 33.33

Total 150 100.00 225 100.00 375 100.00

Source: Primary Data

3. Age

Age of respondents is another important factor which influences determining

the level of satisfaction of employees of telephone users. The age wise classification

of respondents are depicted in Table 4.3.

Table.4.3

Age wise Distribution of Respondents

Details of Employees’ Age

District

Below 35 yrs 35 - 50 yrs Above 50 yrs Total

No.Per centage No.

Per centage No.

Per centage No.

Per centage

Thiruvananthapuram 32 35.16 61 33.70 32 31.07 125 33.33

Ernakulam 29 31.87 57 31.49 39 37.86 125 33.33

Kannur 30 32.97 63 34.81 32 31.07 125 33.33

Total 91 100.00 181 100.00 103 100.00 375 100.00

Source : Primary Data

235

Age group of the respondents in the sample revealed (Table 3.3) that majority

of the respondents are in the age group of 35 to 50 years (48 per cent). 103

respondents (28 per cent) of the total respondents are in the age group of above 50

years and the rest 91 respondents (26 per cent) in the age group of less than 35 years.

It is concluded that a large majority of the respondents in the sample are in the age

group between 35 and 50 years and a large majority are from Thiruvananthapuram

and Kannur districts.

4. Educational Qualification

The educational qualification of respondents is another major attribute

determining the stakeholder satisfaction on the service given by DOT and BSNL.

The higher the level of education the better the ability to judge the performance of the

organisation. The details of educational qualification of respondents are furnished in

Table 4.4

Table 4.4

Educational Qualification wise Classification

Details of Employees’ Qualification

District

Below Degree Degree

Above Degree Total

No Per centage No

Per centage No

Per centage No

Per centage

Thiruvananthapuram 48 41.74 45 26.63 32 35.16 125 33.33

Ernakulam 34 29.57 58 34.32 33 36.26 125 33.33

Kannur 33 28.70 66 39.05 26 28.57 125 33.33

Total 115 100.00 169 100.00 91 100.00 375 100.00

Source : Primary Data .

236

As is noticed from the Table 4.4 169 respondents (45 per cent) of the sample

are educated at the graduation level. 115 respondents (31 per cent) have an education

level at below graduation and the rest 91 respondents have an education of above

graduation (24 per cent). It can be concluded that the large majority of the

respondents are in the level of education at degree level and at above degree level.

Part II - ANALYSIS ON THE OPINIONS OF EMPLOYEES

The analysis of opinion of the employees in the organization is analysed by

taking into consideration of the Five main variable viz, Organisational Dimension

(V2) with 20 sub-variables, People Dimension (V3) with 37 sub-variables,

Technological Dimension (V4) with 10 sub-variables, Planning and Management

Dimension (V5) with 11 sub-variables and Operational Dimension (V6) with 6 sub-

variables. Let us analyse the variables one by one:

I. MAIN VARIABLE – ORGANISATIONAL DIMENSION (V2)

The level of satisfaction of employees belong to the BSNL are analysed by

taking into account the dimension of the organisation concerned. It is a perceived fact

that the role played in retaining DOT and BSNL is possible only if they extent the

same kind of services as provided by the competitor or MNCs. The identified main

variable organisation factor is a combined effect of several identified sub-variables.

In this case, 20 sub-variables identified for assessing the level of satisfaction of

employees of BSNL in the pre and post corporatisation are analysed in the foregoing

paragraphs:

1. Number of Layers in the Organisation

The employees’ structure in the organisation is analysed by taking into account

the different layers in the organisation. There exists different layers in providing

237

services like A, B, C and, D Grade type of employees. Those who are placed in the

different layers are looked into for knowing the level of satisfaction attained by them

during the pre and post corporatisation.

The opinions of employees on their satisfaction about the number of layers in

the organisation on pre-corporatisation era is collected and is presented as item

number V2.1 of Table 4.5. In this case 186 respondents (50 per cent) marked a level

at 40 per cent and less. In between 50 per cent and 60 per cent levels are marked by

81 respondents (22 per cent) and 48 respondents (13 per cent) respectively. The 80

per cent and above are recorded by 60 respondents (16 per cent). The average score

in this case is 46 per cent with a standard deviation of 21 per cent and a co-variance

of 47. This shows that the employees were not satisfied with the number of layers in

the organization during the pre-corporatisation era.

The opinions of employees on their satisfaction about the number of layers in

the organisation in the post-corporatisation era is collected and is presented as item

number V2.1 of Table 4.6. The expressed views are 40 per cent and less by 164

respondents (44 per cent). Between 50 per cent and 60 per cent levels are marked by

81 respondents (22 per cent) and 48 respondents (13 per cent) respectively. But 46

respondents (12 per cent) and 36 respondents (10 per cent) marked a level between

80 per cent and 100 per cent. The average score in this case is 53 per cent with a

standard deviation of 23 per cent and a co-variance of 43. The average makes it

clear that the employees are satisfied with the present system of layers in the

organisation.

238

2. Degree of centralization

Another important variable used for analysis is degree of centralization in the

organization. The power of organization are scattered from the top to the bottom

depending on the type and nature of the work especially service. It means that there

exists centralization and decentralization depending on the nature and work or

operation of services. A via media between the two exists in the organization.

The opinion of employees on the degree of centralisation in the organisation

on pre-corporatisation era is depicted as item number V2.2 of Table 4.5. The level of

opinion is marked at 40 per cent and less by 313 respondents (83 per cent). 62

respondents marked a level at 60 per cent and a minor per cent in 80 per cent. The

average score in this case is 32 per cent with a standard deviation of 15 per cent and a

co-variance of 47. This shows that there was centralisation but it was not high.

The opinion of employees on their satisfaction about the degree of

centralisation in the organisation on the post-corporatisation is shown as item

number V2.2 of Table 4.6. The expressed views are 40 per cent and less by 308

respondents (82 per cent). Between 60 per cent and 80 per cent level is marked by 67

respondents (18 per cent). The average score in this case is 35 per cent with a

standard deviation of 13 per cent and a co-variance of 37. The average pin points

that the employees are not satisfied with the present system of the degree of

centralisation.

3. Emphasis on Structure and Procedure or Formality

The structure and procedures of extending services are another variable which

affect the level of satisfaction of employees in the organisation. The cumbersome

formalities reduce the role of employees in providing services of various kinds and

the formalities are liberal in turn increase the role in extending of services.

239

The opinion of employees on their level of satisfaction on emphasis on

structure and procedures is given as item number V2.3 of Table 4.5. The respondents’

opinion falls up to and less than 40 per cent by 31 respondents (9 per cent). In

between 50 per cent and 60 per cent levels are marked by 28 respondents (7 per cent)

and 271 respondents (72 per cent) respectively. The 80 per cent and above are

recorded by 45 respondents (12 per cent). The average score in this case is 58 per

cent with a standard deviation of 16 per cent and a co-variance of 27. The high

average shows that the employees are satisfied with the present structure and

formalities of the organisation.

The opinions of employees on their satisfaction about the structure and

procedures in the organisation during the post-corporatisation is given as item

number V2.3 of Table 4.6. The expressed views are 40 per cent and less by only 14

respondents (4 per cent) and none of them marked a level at 20 per cent and less.

Between 50 per cent and 60 per cent levels are marked by 28 respondents (7 per

cent) and 272 respondents (73 per cent) respectively. But 41 respondents (11 per

cent) and 20 respondents (5 per cent) marked a level between 80 per cent and 100 per

cent. The average score in this case is 63 per cent with a standard deviation of 12

per cent and a co-variance of 19. The average indicates that the employees are

satisfied with the present system of structure and the procedures.

4. Extent of Entrepreneurship in the Organisation

The entrepreneurial culture is important for any organisation engaged in

production or extending of services. In respect of telecommunication services the

satisfaction depends purely on the entrepreneurial culture exits in the institution.

240

The views of employees on the extent of entrepreneurship in the organisation

on pre-corporatisation era are depicted as item number V2.4 of Table 4.5. The marked

level of opinion at 40 per cent and less by 217 respondents (59 per cent), whereas

between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 78 respondents (21 per cent) and 31

respondents (8 per cent) respectively. Only 49 respondents (13 per cent) at 80 per

cent and above. The average score in this case is 41 per cent with a standard

deviation of 23 per cent and a co-variance of 56. The mean score revealed that the

extent of entrepreneurship in the organisation was not up to the mark.

The opinions of employees on their satisfaction on the extent of

entrepreneurship in the organisation during the post-corporatisation period is

depicted as item number V2.4 of Table 4.6. The expressed views are 40 per cent and

less by 182 respondents (49 per cent). Between 50 per cent and 60 per cent levels are

marked by 78 respondents (21 per cent) and 32 respondents (9 per cent) respectively.

But a high level is marked at 80 per cent and above by 83 respondents (22 per cent).

The average score of opinion level is 50 per cent with a standard deviation of 24 per

cent and a co-variance of 47. The average score of opinions of employees reveal

that they are satisfied with the extent of entrepreneurship in the organisation in the

corporatised era .

5. Strength of Company’s Market Research System

The next important variable looked into for knowing the level of satisfaction

of employees in the BSNL is the strength of company’s market research system.

There is high turnover and generation of more revenue basically on the company’s

system for strengthening the marketing activities in the globalised era.

241

The views of employees on the Strength of company’s market system in the

organisation on pre-corporatisation era is given as item number V2.5 of Table 4.5.

The level of opinion is marked at 40 per cent and less by 24 respondents (7 per cent),

whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 61 respondents (16 per

cent) and 109 respondents (29 per cent) respectively. A large majority of the

respondents, 181 respondents (48 per cent) at 80 per cent and none of them recorded

a level at above 80 per cent. The average score in this case is 65 per cent with a

standard deviation of 19 per cent and a co-variance of 30. The mean score reveals that

the there existed a good market research system in the organisation.

The opinion of employee on the strength of company’s market system in the

organisation on post-corporatisation era is shown as item number V2.5 of Table 4.6.

The level of opinion is marked at 40 per cent and less by only 2 respondents (1 per

cent), whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 61 respondents (16

per cent) and 109 respondents (29 per cent) respectively. A large majority of the

respondents, 173 respondents (46 per cent) at 80 per cent and 30 respondents (8 per

cent ) at 100 per cent. The average score in this case is 71 per cent with a standard

deviation of 15 per cent and a co-variance of 21. The mean score reveals that there

exists a good market research system in BSNL than the pre-corporatisation era.

6. Company’s Customer Performance Feedback System

The improvement in customer orientation is made possible only when there is

feedback process. It is made for knowing the level of satisfaction attained by the

customers from this organization and it helps them in improving the existing position

of services delivery.

242

The views of employees on the DOT’s Customer Performance Feedback

system in the organisation on pre-corporatisation era are given as item number V2.6

of Table 4.5. The level of opinion is marked at 40 per cent and less by 274

respondents (73 per cent), whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by

44 respondents (12 per cent) and 43 respondents (11 per cent) respectively. Only 14

respondents (3 per cent) at 80 per cent and above. The average score in this case is

35 per cent with a standard deviation of 20 per cent and a co-variance of 58. The

mean score reveals that the respondents were not satisfied with the system of

performance feedback in DOT.

The opinion of employees on their satisfaction on the company’s customer

performance feedback system in the organisation during the post-corporatisation

period is depicted as item number V2.6 of Table 4.6. The expressed views are 40

per cent and less by 240 respondents (64 per cent). Between 50 per cent and 60 per

cent levels are marked by 45 respondents (12 per cent) and 43 respondents (11 per

cent) respectively. But a high level is marked at 80 per cent and above by 47

respondents (13 per cent). The average score of opinion level is 44 per cent with a

standard deviation of 25 per cent and a co-variance of 58. The average score of

opinions of employees reveal that they are not satisfied with the system of

performance feedback in the organisation in the post-corporatized era .

7. Company’s Competitor Intelligence System

The success or failure of organization in the globalised era depends on the

ability on assessing the competitor policies and practices for knowing the strengths

and weakness that the organization possess in the process of survival and growth.

243

The views of employees on the competitor intelligence system in the

organisation on pre-corporatisation era is shown as item number V2.7 of Table 4.5.

The level of opinion is marked at 40 per cent and less by 20 respondents (5 per cent),


cent) and 60 respondents (16 per cent) respectively. A large majority of the

respondents, 257 respondents (69 per cent) at 80 per cent and none of them recorded

a level of above 80 per cent. The average score in this case is 71 per cent with a

standard deviation of 15 per cent and a co-variance of 21. The mean score reveals

that there existed a good competitor intelligence system in the organisation.

The opinions of employees on company’s competitor intelligence system in

the organisation during the post-corporatisation period are shown as item number

V2.7 of Table 4.6. The expressed views are 40 per cent and less by 12 respondents (3

per cent). Between 50 per cent and 60 per cent levels are marked by 37 respondents

(10 per cent) and 60 respondents (16 per cent) respectively. But a high level is

marked at 80 per cent and above by 240 respondents (64 per cent) and 26 respondents

(7 per cent) marked a very high level of 100 per cent. The average score of opinion

level is 74 per cent with a standard deviation of 14 per cent and a co-variance of 19.

The average score of opinions of employees shows the company’s competitor

intelligence system is very high in the organisation in the corporatized era.

8. Company’s Linkage with Suppliers

A proper linkage with the stakeholders of the organization is important for

improving their conditions. An important stake part of the organization is supplier.

So it should maintain a proper linkage with the suppliers for their continuous services.

244

The opinion of employees on the company’s linkage with suppliers in the

organisation on pre-corporatisation era is depicted as item number V2.8 of Table 4.5.

The level of opinion is marked at 40 per cent and less by 237 respondents (64 per

cent), whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by85 respondents (23

per cent) and 27 respondents (7 per cent) respectively. Only 26 respondents (7 per

cent) at 80 per cent and none of them marked above this level. The average score in

this case is 38 per cent with a standard deviation of 19 per cent and a co-variance of

51. The average score indicates that the respondents were not satisfied with the

system of linkage with customers in the organisation.

The opinion of employees on their satisfaction on the company’s linkage

with suppliers in the organisation during the post-corporatisation period are

depicted as item number V2.8 of Table 4.6. The expressed views are 40 per cent and

less by 216 respondents (58 per cent). Between 50 per cent and 60 per cent levels are

marked by 86 respondents (23 per cent) and 31 respondents (8 per cent) respectively.

But a high level is marked at 80 per cent and above by 42 respondents (11 per cent).

The average score of opinion level is 42 per cent with a standard deviation of 19 per

cent and a co-variance of 45. The average score of opinions of employees on the

company’s linkage with suppliers is not satisfactory in the post corporatized era .

9. Company’s Linkage with Customers

The most important stakepart of any organization in delivering goods or

services is the customer. Creation of customer is important for any organization which

in turn determines the existence and survival of the organization and they are treated

as the king now ( let the buyer beware of ).

245

The opinions of employees on the company’s linkage with customers in the

organisation on pre-corporatisation era are given as item number V2.9 of Table 4.5.

The level of opinion is marked at 40 per cent and less by 128 respondents (34 per


per cent) and 63 respondents (17 per cent) respectively. Majority of the respondents,

105 respondents (28 per cent) at 80 per cent and above. The average score in this

case is 54 per cent with a standard deviation of 22 per cent and a co-variance of 41.

The mean score reveals that the DOT’s linkage with customers was satisfactory.

The views of employees s on the company’s linkages with customers in the

organisation during the post-corporatisation period are given as item number V2.9

of Table 4.6. The expressed views are 40 per cent and less by 101 respondents (27

per cent). Between 50 per cent and 60 per cent levels are marked by 79 respondents

(21 per cent) and 63 respondents (17 per cent) respectively. But a high level is

marked at 80 per cent by 103 respondents (27 per cent) and 29 respondents (8 per

cent) marked a level at 100 per cent. The average score of opinion level is 61 per cent

with a standard deviation of 19 per cent and a co-variance of 32. The average score

of opinions of employees reveal that the company’s linkage with customers is

satisfactory in the post-corporatisation period also.

10. Adequacy of Resources

Another important variable which determines the performance of the

organization is adequacy of resources of all kinds. Finance and other input resources

are needed for strengthening the service delivery process of the organisation.

The opinion of employee on adequacy of resources in the pre-corporatisation

era is shown as item number V2.10 of Table 4.5. The level of opinion at 40 per cent

246

and less is marked by 92 respondents (25 per cent), whereas between 50 and 60

per cent levels are marked by 59 respondents (16 per cent) and 95 respondents (25

per cent) respectively. Majority of the respondents, 129 respondents (34 per cent),

marked a level at 80 per cent and above. The average score in this case is 57 per

cent with a standard deviation of 23 per cent and a co-variance of 41. The mean

score reveals that there existed adequacy of resources in the organisation in the pre-

corporatisation period.

The opinion of employees on adequacy of resources in the organisation

during the post-corporatisation period are presented as item number V2.10 of

Table 4.6. The expressed views are 40 per cent and less by 67 respondents (18 per

cent). Between 50 per cent and 60 per cent levels are marked by 59 respondents (16

per cent) and 96 respondents (26 per cent) respectively. But a high level is marked at

80 per cent by 131 respondents (35 per cent) and 22 respondents (6 per cent) marked

a very high level at cent per cent. The average score of opinion level is 63 per cent

with a standard deviation of 19 per cent and a co-variance of 31. This high average

score of opinions of employees indicates that there is adequacy of resources in the

organisation in the post corporatized era

247

Tabl

e 4.

5 M

ain

Var

iabl

e: O

RG

AN

ISA

TIO

NA

L D

IME

NSI

ON

(V2)

( It

em N

umbe

r V

2.1 t

o V

2.10)

(Pr

ior

to C

orpo

ratis

atio

n)

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Stat

istic

s All

0

2040

50

6080

100

Perc

A

vgSD

C

V

V2.1

N

umbe

r of l

ayer

s in

the

orga

niza

tion

No

2252

112

8148

564

375

46

21

47

%

614

30

2213

151

100

V2.2

D

egre

e of

cen

traliz

atio

n N

o 36

103

174

583

10

375

32

15

47

%

1027

46

151

00

100

V2.3

Em

phas

is o

n st

ruct

ure

and

proc

edur

e (f

orm

ality

)N

o 17

014

28

271

414

375

58

16

27

%

50

4 7

7211

110

0

V2.4

Ex

tent

of e

ntre

pren

eurs

hip

in th

e or

gani

zatio

n N

o 36

8110

0 78

3146

337

541

23

56

%

10

2227

21

812

110

0

V2.5

St

reng

th o

f com

pany

’s m

arke

t res

earc

h sy

stem

N

o 17

52

6110

918

10

375

65

19

30

%

51

1 16

2948

010

0

V2.6

C

ompa

ny’s

cus

tom

er p

erfo

rman

ce fe

edba

ck

syst

em

No

3513

010

9 44

439

537

535

20

58

%

9

3529

12

112

110

0

V2.7

C

ompa

ny’s

com

petit

or in

telli

genc

e sy

stem

N

o 1

811

38

6025

70

375

71

15

21

%

02

3 10

1669

010

0

V2.8

C

ompa

ny’s

link

age

with

supp

liers

N

o 17

134

86

8527

260

375

38

19

51

%

536

23

237

70

100

V2.9

C

ompa

ny’s

link

age

with

cus

tom

ers

No

274

97

7963

104

137

554

22

41

%

7

126

21

1728

010

0

V2.1

0 A

dequ

acy

of re

sour

ces

No

2521

46

5995

124

537

557

23

41

%

7

612

16

2533

110

0So

urce

: SPS

S O

ut P

ut o

f Prim

ary

Dat

a

248

Tabl

e 4.

6 M

ain

Var

iabl

e: O

RG

AN

ISA

TIO

NA

L D

IME

NSI

ON

(V2)

( It

em N

umbe

r V

2.1 t

o V

2.10)

(Pos

t-C

orpo

ratis

atio

n )

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Stat

istic

s All

0

20

4050

6080

100

Perc

A

vg

SD

CV

V2.1

N

umbe

r of l

ayer

s in

the

orga

niza

tion

No

052

11

281

4846

3637

553

23

43

%

0

14

3022

1312

1010

0

V2.2

D

egre

e of

cen

traliz

atio

n N

o 10

113

185

614

20

375

35

13

37

%

330

49

161

10

100

V2.3

Em

phas

is o

n st

ruct

ure

and

proc

edur

e (f

orm

ality

) N

o 0

0 14

2827

241

2037

563

12

19

%

0

0 4

773

115

100

V2.4

Ex

tent

of e

ntre

pren

eurs

hip

in th

e or

gani

zatio

n N

o 0

81

101

7832

5231

375

50

24

47

%

022

27

219

148

100

V 2.5

St

reng

th o

f com

pany

’s m

arke

t res

earc

h sy

stem

N

o 0

0 2

6110

917

330

375

71

15

21

%

00

116

2946

810

0

V2.6

C

ompa

ny’s

cus

tom

er p

erfo

rman

ce fe

edba

ck

syst

em

No

612

5 10

945

432

4537

544

25

58

%

2

33

2912

111

1210

0

V2.7

C

ompa

ny’s

com

petit

or in

telli

genc

e sy

stem

N

o 0

1 11

3760

240

2637

574

14

19

%

0

0 3

1016

647

100

V2.8

C

ompa

ny’s

link

age

with

supp

liers

N

o 0

120

9686

3141

137

542

19

45

%

0

32

2623

811

010

0

V2.9

C

ompa

ny’s

link

age

with

cus

tom

ers

No

04

9779

6310

329

375

61

19

32

%

01

2621

1727

810

0

V2.1

0 A

dequ

acy

of re

sour

ces

No

021

46

5996

131

2237

563

19

31

%

0

6 12

1626

356

100

Sour

ce: S

PSS

Out

Put

of P

rimar

y D

ata

249

11. Reputation of the Company

The best service is usually extended by all organizations with a hidden

objective of increasing their image or fame. In the globalised era there exists

competition which usually benefited to the people and they usually prefer reputed

companies for getting better services.

The views of employees on reputation of the company in the pre-

corporatisation era are given as item number V2.11 of Table 4.7. The level of

opinion at 40 per cent and less is recorded by 50 respondents (13 per cent), whereas

between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 50 respondents (13 per cent) and

122 respondents (33 per cent) respectively. Majority of the respondents, 153

respondents, 41 per cent marked a level at 80 per cent and above. The average

score in this case is 60 per cent with a standard deviation of 25 per cent and a co-

variance of 42. The mean score reveals that the DOT had sufficient reputation in the

pre-corporatisation period.

The views of employees on reputation of the company in the post-


opinion at 40 per cent and less is recorded by a minor number of 4 respondents (1 per


per cent) and 122 respondents (33 per cent) respectively. Majority of the respondents,

123 respondents, 33 per cent marked a level at 80 per cent and 91 respondents (24

per cent) marked a level at cent per cent. The average score in this case is very high

as 75 per cent with a standard deviation of 17 per cent and a co-variance of 23. The

mean score reveals that the respondents viewed that the company has sufficient

reputation even in the post-corporatisation period.

250

12. Physical Work Environment

The next important variable which is examined for the service delivery for

better satisfaction is the physical work environment exists in the organization. The

employees’ satisfaction depends on the physical work environment provided by the

organization.

The views of employees on reputation of the company in the pre-

corporatisation era are depicted as item number V2.12 of Table 4.7. The level of



159 respondents (42 per cent) respectively. 49 respondents (14 per cent) marked a

level at 80 per cent and above. The average score in this case 55 per cent with a


that the respondents were satisfied with the DOT’s physical work environment in

the organisation in the pre-corporatisation period.

The opinion of employees on physical work environment of the company in

the post-corporatisation era is depicted as item number V2.12 of Table 4.8. The

level of opinion at 40 per cent and less is recorded by 23 respondents (7 per cent),


cent) and 159 respondents (42 per cent) respectively. 65 respondents (18 per cent)

marked a level at 80 per cent and above. The average score in this case 60 per cent

with a standard deviation of 14 per cent and a co-variance of 24. The mean score

reveals that the respondents are satisfied with the company’s physical work

environment in the organisation in the post-corporatisation period.

251

13. Cross –department Relations

Another important variable which determines the satisfaction level of

employees is the cross department relations exist in the organisation. The employees

are satisfied with those organisation having better cross department relations.

The opinion of employees on cross department relations of the company in the

pre-corporatisation era is shown as item number V2.13 of Table 4.7. The level of



respondents (24 per cent) respectively. 47 respondents (13 per cent) marked a level

at 80 per cent and none of them recorded a level at cent per cent. The average score


of 40. The mean score reveals that there existed cross department relations in the

organisation in the pre-corporatisation period.

The views of employees on cross department relations in the organisation in

the post-corporatisation era is shown as item number V2.13 of Table 4.8. The level

of opinion at 40 per cent and less is recorded by 46 respondents (12 per cent),





reveals that the respondents are satisfied with the company’s cross department

relations are satisfactory in the post-corporatisation period.

252

14. Communication Between Units

Communication between Units is a factor which is directly related to the

growth of an organization as the employees are more satisfied with an organization

having good communication between units. The opinion of employees on

communication between units in the pre-corporatisation era is given as item

number V2.14 of Table 4.7. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and less is recorded by

49 respondents (13 per cent), whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels are

marked by 136 respondents (36 per cent) and 105 respondents (28 per cent)

respectively. 85 respondents (23 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and above.

The average score on it is 57 per cent with a standard deviation of 17 per cent and a

co-variance of 29. The mean score reveals that there was communication in between

units in the organisation in the pre-corporatisation period.

The views of employees on communication between units of the organisation

in the post-corporatisation era is given as item number V2.14 of Table 4.8. The

level of opinion at 40 per cent and less is recorded by 39 respondents (10 per cent),





reveals that the respondents are satisfied with the company’s communication between

units in the post-corporatisation period.

15. Gender Balancing

The next variable which is taken for evaluating the satisfaction level of

employees is the gender balancing. A balance in between males and females in the

organisation is important for keeping a better level of satisfaction.

253

The opinions of employees on gendering balancing in the organisation during

the pre-corporatisation era are shown as item number V2.15 of Table 4.7. The level

of opinion at 40 per cent and less is recorded by 84 respondents (23 per cent),



marked a level at 80 per cent and above. The average score in this case is 55 per


score reveals that there existed gender balance in the organisation in the pre-


The views of employees on gender balancing in the company in the post-

corporatisation era is depicted as item number V2.15 of Table 4.8. The level of


between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 108 respondents (29 per cent ) and

111 respondents (30 per cent) respectively. 73 respondents (20 per cent) marked a

level at 80 per cent and above. The average score in this case is 57 per cent with a


that there exist gender balancing in the organisation in the post-corporatisation

period also.

16. Loyalty to the Organisation

The loyalty to the organisation is another important variable in determining

the level of satisfaction of employees. The employees become loyal to the

organisation when better the facilities are extend to them .

The views of employees on loyalty to the organisation in the pre-


254



respondents (12 per cent) respectively. 161 respondents (43 per cent) marked a level

at 80 per cent and above. The average score in this case is 59 per cent with a


that the employees were loyal to the organisation in the pre-corporatisation period.

The views of employees on loyalty to the organisation in the post

corporatisation era is depicted as item number V2.16 of Table 4.8. The level of



respondents (12 per cent) respectively. A large majority of the respondents marked a

higher level at 80 per cent and above by 161 respondents (43 per cent). The average

score in this case is 62 per cent with a standard deviation of 25 per cent and a co

variance of 40. The mean score reveals that the employees are very loyal to the

organisation in the post-corporatisation period.

17. Quality of Organisations

The quality of the organistion is important in determining the level of

satisfaction of employees. The better the quality offered by the organisation the

better the services provided by the employees to their customers.

The views of employees on quality of the organisation in the pre-




respondents (29 per cent) respectively. A large majority of the respondents, 198

255

respondents (53 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and none of them recorded a

level of cent per cent. The average score in this case is 68 per cent with a standard

deviation of 14 per cent and a co-variance of 20. The mean score reveals that the

respondents were satisfied with the quality of the organisation in the pre-


The views of employees on quality of organisations in the post-


opinion at 40 per cent and less is recorded by only 23 respondents (6 per cent),



marked a level at 80 per cent and 28 respondents (7 per cent) at cent per cent. The

average score in this case 70 per cent with a standard deviation of 16 per cent and a

co-variance of 23. The mean score reveals that the respondents are satisfied with the

quality of the organisation in the post-corporatisation period.

18. Fairness of Organisation

Fairness of the organistion is another determinant in assessing the level of

satisfaction from the organisation. The organisation’s fairness in extending their

services leads to quality services.

The opinion of employees on Fairness of organisation in the pre-

corporatisation era is shown as item number V2.18 of Table 4.7. The level of opinion

at 40 per cent and less is recorded by 14 respondents (3 per cent), whereas between

50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 22 respondents (6 per cent) and 59


respondents (68 per cent) marked a level at 75 per cent and 26 respondents (7 per

256

cent) at cent per cent. The average score in this case is 75 per cent with a standard

deviation of 14 per cent and a co-variance of 19. The mean score reveals that there

existed fairness in the organisation in the pre-corporatisation period.

The opinions of employees on fairness of organisation in the post-





respondents (40 per cent) and 129 respondents (34 per cent) marked a level at 80 per

cent and cent per cent. The average score in this case is 80 per cent with a standard


respondents are satisfied with the fairness exist in the organisation in the post-


19. Proud on Organisation

The organisation and its proud in giving services to the employees is another

factor taken for evaluating the service facilities of the employees in the organisation.

The opinions of employees on the proud of organisation in the pre-

corporatisation era are shown as item number V2.19 of Table 4.7. The level of



116 respondents (31 per cent) respectively. A very high level at 80 per cent and above

is marked by 106 respondents (28 per cent). The average score in this case is 61 per


257

score reveals that the respondents were proud on their organisation in the pre-


The views of employees on proud of organisation in the post-corporatisation

era are depicted as item number V2.19 of Table 4.8. The level of opinion at 40 per

cent and less is recorded by 31 respondents (8 per cent), whereas between 50 and

60 per cent levels are marked by 123 respondents (33 per cent) and 117 respondents

(31 per cent) respectively, whereas 104 respondents (27 per cent) marked a level at

80 per cent and above. The average score in this case is 62 per cent with a standard


respondents are proud on their organisation even during the post-corporatisation

period.

20. Organisational Dynamism

The dynamism in the organisation in giving services to the stakepart in the

organisation is yet another factor responsible for knowing the level of satisfaction of

employees.

The opinions of employees on the organisational dynamism in the pre-

corporatisation era are given as item number V2.20 of Table 4.7. The level of opinion

at 40 per cent and less is recorded by 126 respondents (34 per cent), whereas


respondents (26 per cent) respectively. But only 61 respondents (17 per cent) marked

a level at 80 per cent and above. The average score in this case 54 per cent with a


that the respondents were satisfied with the DOT’s organisational dynamism in the


258

The opinions of employees on organisational dynamism exists in the

company in the post-corporatisation era are given as item number V2.20 of Table

4.8. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and less is recorded by 126 respondents (34

per cent), whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 89 respondents

(24 per cent) and 99 respondents (26 per cent) respectively. Only 61 respondents (16

per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and above. The average score in this case is


mean score reveals that the respondents are satisfied with the company’s

organisational dynamism in the post-corporatisation period.

259

Tabl

e 4.

7 M

ain

Var

iabl

e: O

RG

AN

ISA

TIO

NA

L D

IME

NSI

ON

(V2)

( It

em N

umbe

r V

2.11

to V

2.20)

(Pri

or to

Cor

pora

tisat

ion)

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Stat

istic

s All

0

2040

50

60

8010

0Pe

rcA

vg

SD

CV

V2.1

1 R

eput

atio

n of

the

com

pany

N

o 43

34

50

122

149

437

560

25

42

%

11

11

13

3340

110

0

V2.1

2 Ph

ysic

al w

ork

envi

ronm

ent

No

162

21

128

159

472

375

55

16

29

%

41

6 34

42

131

100

V2.1

3 C

ross

-dep

artm

ent r

elat

ions

N

o 37

145

15

4 91

470

375

50

20

40

%

100

12

41

2413

010

0

V2.1

4 C

omm

unic

atio

n be

twee

n un

its

No

111

37

136

105

832

375

57

17

29

%

30

10

36

2822

110

0

V2.1

5 G

ende

r bal

anci

ng

No

232

50

108

111

720

375

55

17

31

%

19

13

29

3019

010

0

V2.1

6 Lo

yalty

to th

e or

gani

zatio

n N

o 0

3588

46

45

161

037

559

21

35

%

0

923

12

12

430

100

V2.1

7 Q

ualit

y of

org

aniz

atio

ns

No

00

23

46

108

198

037

568

14

20

%

0

06

12

2953

010

0

V2.1

8 Fa

irnes

s of o

rgan

izat

ion

No

05

9 22

59

254

2637

575

14

19

%

0

12

6 16

687

100

V2.1

9 Pr

oud

on o

rgan

izat

ion

No

03

27

123

116

105

137

561

14

23

%

0

17

33

3128

010

0

V2.2

0 O

rgan

isat

iona

l Dyn

amis

m

No

210

114

89

9959

237

554

15

29

%

1

330

24

26

161

100

Sour

ce: S

PSS

Out

Put

of P

rimar

y D

ata

260

Tabl

e 4.

8

Mai

n V

aria

ble:

OR

GA

NIS

AT

ION

AL

DIM

EN

SIO

N (V

2) (

Item

Num

ber

V2.1

1 to

V2.2

0) (P

ost-

Cor

pora

tisat

ion)

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Stat

istic

s All

0

2040

50

6080

100

Perc

A

vg

SD

CV

V2.1

1 R

eput

atio

n of

the

com

pany

N

o 0

04

3512

212

391

375

75

17

23

%

00

1 9

3333

2410

0

V2.1

2 Ph

ysic

al w

ork

envi

ronm

ent

No

02

21

128

159

4421

375

60

14

24

%

01

6 34

4212

610

0

V2.1

3 C

ross

-dep

artm

ent r

elat

ions

N

o 0

145

15

491

4242

375

60

18

30

%

00

12

4124

1111

100

V2.1

4 C

omm

unic

atio

n be

twee

n un

its

No

11

37

136

105

7718

375

60

16

26

%

00

10

3628

215

100

V2.1

5 G

ende

r bal

anci

ng

No

132

50

108

111

3241

375

57

21

36

%

09

13

2930

911

100

V2.1

6 Lo

yalty

to th

e or

gani

zatio

n N

o 0

3588

46

4510

160

375

62

25

40

%

09

23

1212

2716

100

V2.1

7 Q

ualit

y of

org

aniz

atio

ns

No

00

23

4610

817

028

375

70

16

23

%

00

6 12

2945

710

0

V2.1

8 Fa

irnes

s of o

rgan

izat

ion

No

05

9 22

5915

112

937

580

18

23

%

0

12

616

4034

100

V2.1

9 Pr

oud

on o

rgan

izat

ion

No

03

28

123

117

6935

375

62

17

28

%

01

7 33

3118

910

0

V2.2

0 O

rgan

isat

iona

l Dyn

amis

m

No

210

114

8999

4318

375

54

17

32

%

13

30

2426

115

100

Sour

ce: S

PSS

Out

Put

of P

rimar

y D

ata

261

II. MAIN VARIABLE – PEOPLE DIMENSION (V3)

The employees are the most crucial factor in any organisation to whom they

have connection with various stakeholders of the organisation. Their level in the

organisation and their satisfaction are very important considerations for giving

benefits to the customers. It is not an exception to telecommunication too in the

globalised scenario. The satisfaction levels of employees belong to the BSNL are

analysed by taking into account the main variable people dimension. In this case 37

sub-variables are identified for assessing the level of satisfaction of employees in the

pre and post corporatisation of DOT. They are:

1. Employee Involvement in Design

Employee involvement in all activities of the organisation is important for

getting the desired level of achievement. Because they are the persons who have some

connections with the media, society, suppliers, customers, competitors, political

parties and the government officials. So provide opportunity to participate the

employees in all matters of the business other than their personal matters is of much

importance for the betterment of the level of attainment of the objectives of the

organisation.

The opinion on the level of satisfaction of employees on this sub-variable is

collected and is presented as item number V3.1 of Table 4.9. The level of opinion at

40 per cent and less is marked by 123 respondents (33 per cent), whereas 60


50 and 60 per cent. But 126 respondents (34 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent

and none of them marked a level of above 80 per cent. The average score in this case

is 56 per cent with a standard deviation of 21 per cent and a co-variance of 38. The

262

mean score indicates that there was involvement of employee in designing the

programmes in the pre-corporatisation period.

The views of respondents on the level of satisfaction on this sub-variable are

shown as item number V3.1 of Table 4.10. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and

less is marked by 118 respondents (32 per cent), whereas 60 respondents (16 per

cent) and 66 respondents (18 per cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent.

But 65 respondents (17 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 66 respondents

(18 per cent) marked a very high level at cent per cent. The average score in this case

is 60 per cent with a standard deviation of 25 per cent and a co-variance of 41. The

mean score makes it clear that there is greater involvement of employee in designing

the programmes in the post-corporatisation period.

2. Employee Involvement in Planning

Planning is a pervasive function and is applicable in every case. For fulfilment

of the objectives it is necessary to involve all people in the organisation to plan the

activities to be carried out for better satisfaction and result.


collected and is presented as item number V3.2 of Table 4.9. The level of opinion at

40 per cent and less is marked by 22 respondents (6 per cent), whereas 65


50 and 60 per cent. But a very high number, 178 respondents (47 per cent) marked

a level at 80 per cent and none of them marked a level of above 80 per cent. The


co-variance of 22. The mean score indicates that there was involvement of employee

in formulating the planning programmes in the pre-corporatisation period.

263

The views on the level of satisfaction of respondents on this sub-variable are

given as item number V3.2 of Table 4.10. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and

less is marked by 22 respondents (6 per cent), whereas 65 respondents (17 per cent)

and 111 respondents (30 per cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent. But

133 respondents (35 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 44 respondents (12

per cent) marked a level at cent per cent. The average score in this case is 69 per cent


indicates that there is involvement of employee in formulating the planning

programmes in the post-corporatisation period also.

3. Employee Education

Education is knowledge and spreading it different aspects and jobs is important for

better service delivery and satisfied workers. So educate employees for better understanding

and behaviour for continued services.


enquired into, collected and shown as item number V3.3 of Table 4.9. The level of

opinion at 40 per cent and less is marked by 192 respondents (51 per cent), whereas

80 respondents (21 per cent) and 46 respondents (12 per cent) marked a level

between 50 and 60 per cent. But 57 respondents (15 per cent) marked a level at 80

per cent and none of them marked a level of above 80 per cent. The average score in


42. The mean score indicates that the education of workers was not satisfactory in

the pre-corporatisation period.

The views of respondents on the level of satisfaction on this sub-variable are

given as item number V3.3 of Table 4.10. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and


264


But 57 respondents (16 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and above. The


co-variance of 42. The mean score indicates that the education of employees is not

satisfactory in the post-corporatisation period.

4. Employee Training

Training is important for giving practical knowledge in a particular task. The

speedy work is ensured when the employees are trained in the field in which they are

engaging or on the job training as well as orientation training for better performance.

The opinion on the level of satisfaction of respondents on this sub-variable is

shown as item number V3.4 of Table 4.9. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and less

is marked by 35 respondents (10 per cent), whereas 52 respondents (14 per cent)


169 respondents (45 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and none of them

marked a level of above 80 per cent. The average score in this case is 66 per cent with

a standard deviation of 14 per cent and a co-variance of 22. The mean score indicates

that the employees were satisfied with the training to employees in the pre-


The level of satisfaction of employees on this sub-variable is collected and is

depicted as item number V3.4 of Table 4.10. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and

less is marked by 35 respondents (10 per cent), whereas 52 respondents (14 per cent)




265


indicates that there is sufficient training to employees in the post-corporatisation

period.

5. Employee Well Being

The workers are satisfied in those cases where the employee well being is

protected. When the welfare of the employees are protected well, the employees

work hard and become loyal to the organization.

The views of employees on the level of satisfaction on this sub-variable are

depicted as item number V3.5 of Table 4.9. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and



But 77 respondents (21 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and none of them

marked a level of above 80 per cent. The average score in this case is 54 per cent with

a standard deviation of 18 per cent and a co-variance of 34. The mean score reveals

that the employees were satisfied with the employee well being in the organisation in


The opinions on the level of satisfaction of employees on this sub-variable are

presented as item number V3.5 of Table 4.10. The level of opinion is marked at 40

per cent and less by 98 respondents (26 per cent), whereas 98 respondents (26 per


But 66 respondents (18 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 13 respondents

(3 per cent) marked a level at cent per cent. The average score in this case is 55 per


score indicates that the employees are satisfied with the well being in the post-


266

6. Employee Morale

The workers need better working conditions, good environment and better

salary. In any case any organisation meets the expectations of the employees, there is

increased moral and high productivity.

The level of opinions of employees on this sub-variable is given as item

number V3.6 of Table 4.9. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and less is marked by

112 respondents (30 per cent), whereas 94 respondents (25 per cent) and 92

respondents (25 per cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent. But 77

respondents (21 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and none of them marked a

level of above 80 per cent. The average score in this case is 51 per cent with a

standard deviation of 22 per cent and a co-variance of 44. The mean score indicates

that the level of employee morale was somewhat satisfactory in the pre-



examined and the collected data is presented as item number V3.6 of Table 4.10.

The level of opinion at 40 per cent and less is marked by 89 respondents (24 per

cent), whereas 96 respondents (26 per cent) and 97 respondents (26 per cent)

marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent. But 93 respondents (25 per cent)

marked a level at 80 per cent and above. The average score in this case is 57 per cent


indicates that the morale of employee is satisfactory in the post-corporatisation period

than before.

7. Employees’ Interaction with Subscribers

An organisation can obtain sufficient customers only when there exists a better

interaction, established with them by the employees. It means a better support and

267

co-operation from the part of employees is a must for better delivery of

services/products.

The level of opinions of employees on this sub-variable is depicted as item





cent) marked a level at cent per cent. The average score in this case is 54 per cent


shows that employees’ interaction with subscribers was satisfactory in the pre-



looked into and the collected data is shown as item number V3.7 of Table 4.10. The

level of opinion at 40 per cent and less is marked by 86 respondents (23 per cent),

whereas 70 respondents (19 per cent) and 47 respondents (13 per cent) marked a

level between 50 and 60 per cent. But 110 respondents (29 per cent) marked a level

at 80 per cent and 62 respondents (17 per cent) marked a level at cent per cent. The


co-variance of 35. The mean score reveals that the employees’ interaction with

subscribers is higher during the post-corporatisation period than before.

8. Employees’ Interaction with Suppliers

Employees are the main stay of every organisation to those who approach the

organisation for any kind of service or for supply of materials. So they must maintain

a better interaction with the suppliers as well.

268

The opinions of employees on this sub-variable are shown as item number

V3.8 of Table 4.9. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and less is marked by 94

respondents (25 per cent), whereas 96 respondents (26 per cent) and 100



cent) marked a level at cent per cent. The average score in this case is 54 per cent with


that the employees’ interaction with suppliers was satisfactory in the pre-


The level of opinion of respondents on this sub-variable is examined and the

collected data is depicted as item number V3.8 of Table 4.10. The level of opinion

at 40 per cent and less is marked by 67 respondents (18 per cent), whereas 97


50 and 60 per cent. But 82 respondents (22 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent

and 29 respondents (8 per cent) marked a very high level at 100 per cent. The average


variance of 31. The mean score indicates that the employees interaction with

suppliers are satisfactory in the post-corporatisation period than before .

9. Active Suggestion System

For improving the present service delivery it requires an active suggestion for

clearing the defect in the present practice of service delivery is informed. Active

suggestion system and its proper consideration of the suggestions put in by the

employees in the organisation for improvement in the performance of the organisation

is considered with due weight .

269

The level of opinion of employees on this sub-variable is shown as item




respondents (12 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and above. The average


variance of 54. The mean score indicates that the active suggestion system from the

part of the employees were not satisfactory in the pre-corporatisation period.

The level of opinion of respondents on this sub-variable is examined and the

collected data is given as item number V3.9 of Table 4.10. 198 respondents (53 per

cent) marked the level of opinion at 40 per cent and less, whereas 68 respondents

(18 per cent) and 52 respondents (14 per cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per

cent. But 57 respondents (15 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and above.

The average score in this case is 45 per cent with a standard deviation of 21 per cent

and a co-variance of 45. The mean score indicates that the employees are not

satisfied with the active suggestion system in the post-corporatisation period.

10. Employee Autonomy

Next important variable considered for becoming satisfied workers in the

organisation is the employee autonomy. The provision of autonomy in the

performance of their tasks is important for a worker in the organisation. This

improves their satisfaction level.

The opinions of employees on this sub-variable are depicted as item number

V3.10 of Table 4.9. 76 respondents (20 per cent) marked the level of opinion at 40

per cent and less, whereas 92 respondents (25 per cent) and 100 respondents (27 per

cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent. But 95 respondents (25 per cent)

270

marked a level at 80 per cent and 12 respondents (3 per cent) marked a level at cent

per cent. The average score in this case is 57 per cent with a standard deviation of 22

per cent and a co-variance of 39. The mean score indicates that the employees were

satisfied with the system of employee autonomy in DOT in the pre-corporatisation

period.

The level of employees on this sub-variable is shown as item number V3.10 of

Table 4.10. 53 respondents (14 per cent) marked the level of opinion at 40 per cent

and less, whereas 93 respondents (25 per cent) and 101 respondents (27 per cent)




per cent and a co-variance of 30. The mean score indicates that the employees are

fully satisfied with the present system of employee autonomy in the post-


271

Tabl

e 4.

9 M

ain

Var

iabl

e: P

EO

PLE

DIM

EN

SIO

N(V

3) (

Item

Num

ber

V3.1

to

V3.1

0) (

Prio

r to

Cor

pora

tisat

ion)

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Satis

fact

ion

Scor

e St

atis

tics A

ll

020

40

5060

8010

0Pe

rc

Avg

SDC

V

V3.1

Em

ploy

ee in

volv

emen

t in

desi

gn

No

541

77

6066

126

037

556

21

38

%

1

1121

16

1834

010

0

V3.2

Em

ploy

ee in

volv

emen

t in

plan

ning

N

o 0

517

65

110

178

037

566

14

22

%

0

15

1729

470

100

V3.3

Em

ploy

ee e

duca

tion

No

088

104

8046

570

375

46

19

42

%

023

28

2112

150

100

V3.4

Em

ploy

ee tr

aini

ng

No

02

33

5211

916

90

375

66

14

22

%

01

9 14

3245

010

0

V3.5

Em

ploy

ee w

ell b

eing

N

o 8

3063

98

9977

037

554

18

34

%

2

817

26

2621

010

0

V3.6

Em

ploy

ee m

oral

e N

o 33

2059

94

9277

037

551

22

44

%

9

516

25

2521

010

0

V3.7

Em

ploy

ees’

inte

ract

ion

with

Su

bscr

iber

s N

o 44

1472

69

4711

019

375

54

27

51

%

124

19

1813

295

100

V3.8

Em

ploy

ees’

inte

ract

ion

with

supp

liers

N

o 28

1155

96

100

805

375

54

22

40

%

73

15

2627

211

100

V3.9

A

ctiv

e su

gges

tion

syst

em

No

2710

289

67

4642

237

541

22

54

%

7

2724

18

1211

110

0

V3.1

0 Em

ploy

ee a

uton

omy

No

2313

40

9210

095

1237

557

22

39

%

6

311

25

2725

310

0So

urce

: SPS

S O

ut P

ut o

f Prim

ary

Dat

a

272

Tabl

e 4.

10

Mai

n V

aria

ble:

PE

OPL

E D

IME

NSI

ON

(V3)

( It

em N

umbe

r V

3.1 t

o V

3.10)

(Pos

t-C

orpo

ratis

atio

n)

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Stat

istic

s All

0

2040

50

6080

100

Perc

A

vg

SD

CV

V3.1

Em

ploy

ee in

volv

emen

t in

desi

gn

No

041

77

6066

6566

375

60

25

41

%

011

21

1618

1718

100

V3.2

Em

ploy

ee in

volv

emen

t in

plan

ning

N

o 0

517

65

111

133

4437

569

18

26

%

0

15

1730

3512

100

V3.3

Em

ploy

ee e

duca

tion

No

088

104

8046

552

375

46

20

42

%

023

28

2112

151

100

V3.4

Em

ploy

ee tr

aini

ng

No

02

33

5211

913

732

375

67

17

25

%

01

9 14

3237

910

0

V3.5

Em

ploy

ee w

ell b

eing

N

o 5

3063

98

100

6613

375

55

19

35

%

18

17

2627

183

100

V3.6

Em

ploy

ee m

oral

e N

o 2

2067

96

9786

737

557

18

31

%

1

518

26

2623

210

0

V3.7

Em

ploy

ees’

inte

ract

ion

with

su

bscr

iber

s N

o 0

1472

70

4711

062

375

65

23

35

%

04

19

1913

2917

100

V3.8

Em

ploy

ees’

inte

ract

ion

with

supp

liers

N

o 0

1156

97

100

8229

375

61

19

31

%

03

15

2627

228

100

V3.9

A

ctiv

e su

gges

tion

syst

em

No

010

494

68

5253

437

545

21

45

%

0

2825

18

1414

110

0

V3.1

0 Em

ploy

ee a

uton

omy

No

013

40

9310

199

2937

562

19

30

%

0

311

25

2726

810

0So

urce

: SPS

S O

ut P

ut o

f Prim

ary

Dat

a

273

11. Support for Professional Activities

Sufficient support for professional activities is required for creating satisfied

workers in the organisation. The organisation must be liberal in supporting for the

professional type of activities undertaken by the employees .

The level of opinions of employees on this sub-variable is given as item

number V3.11 of Table 4.11. 126 respondents (33 per cent) marked the level of

opinion at 40 per cent and less, whereas 53 respondents (14 per cent) and 54





that the employees were satisfied with the system of support for professional activities

in the pre-corporatisation period.

The opinion of employees on this sub-variable is given as item number V3.11

of Table 4.12. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and less is marked by 96

respondents (25 per cent), whereas 53 respondents (14 per cent) and 55 respondents

(15 per cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent. But 94 respondents (25 per

cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and a very high level at 77 respondents (21 per



that the employees are satisfied with the present system of support for professional

activities in the post-corporatisation period.

274

12. Hiring Practice in the Unit

The practice of hiring in the unit is looked into for knowing the performance

of the organisation in bettering their services and for their satisfaction.

The level of opinion of employees on this sub-variable is given as item

number V3.12 of Table 4.11. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and less is marked

by 93 respondents (25 per cent), whereas 93 respondents (25 per cent) and 93


respondents (24 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and only 6 respondents (2

per cent) marked a very high level at cent per cent. The average score in this case is


mean score indicates that the employees were satisfied with the hiring practice in

DOT in the pre-corporatisation period.


number V3.12 of Table 4.12. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and less is marked

by 66 respondents (18 per cent), whereas 93 respondents (25 per cent) and 93



cent) marked a very high level at cent per cent. The average score in this case is 62

per cent with a standard deviation of 19 per cent and a co-variance of 31. The mean

score reveals that the employees are satisfied with the present system of hiring

practice in the post-corporatisation period.

275

13. Clarity of Performance

Another important variable taken for knowing the level of satisfaction in the

organisation is the clarity in performance. Performance and its clarity is important for

knowing the level of satisfaction of employees in the organisation.

The opinion of employees on this sub-variable is shown as item number




marked a level at 80 per cent and 24 respondents (6 per cent) marked a very high

level at cent per cent. The average score in this case is 64 per cent with a standard

deviation of 23 per cent and a co-variance of 36. The mean score indicates that the

employees were very much satisfied with the clarity of performance criteria in the


The opinion of employees on this sub-variable is depicted as item number




marked a level at 80 per cent and 50 respondents (13per cent) marked a very high



employees are very much satisfied with the clarity of performance criteria in the

organisation in the post-corporatisation period.

276

14. Fairness of Workload Distribution

The work load distribution is very important in getting support and co-

operation from the workers in the organisation. The management must be fair while

distributing the workload to the employees .

The Level of opinion of employees on this sub-variable is shown as item




respondents (28 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 25respondents (7 per



score indicates that the employees were very much satisfied with the fairness of

workload distribution in the DOT in the pre-corporatisation period.





respondents (28 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 53 respondents (14per



score indicates that the employees are very much satisfied with the fairness of

workload distribution in the post-corporatisation period.

277

15. Promotion Opportunity

The employees look into the promotion scope in the organisation. The

employees are satisfied in those concerns where there is ample opportunity for

further promotion and development. In the case of DOT and BSNL what type of

opportunities exist in further promotion are important for judging the satisfaction

level of employees.



per cent and less, whereas 69 respondents (18 per cent) and 111 respondents (30

per cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent. But 77 respondents (21 per cent)

marked a level at 80 per cent and none of them marked a level at cent per cent. The


co-variance of 46. The mean score indicates that the employees were somewhat

satisfied with the promotion opportunities in the DOT in the pre-corporatisation

period.





marked a level at 80 per cent and none of them marked a level at cent per cent. The


co-variance of 36. The mean score indicates that the employees are satisfied with the

promotion opportunities in the post-corporatisation period than before.

278

16. Fairness of Hiring External Candidates

Fairness of hiring external candidates whenever necessary is important in

examining the attitude of workers and their level of satisfaction.




per cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent. But 104 respondents (27 per

cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and above. The average score in this case is 58


score indicates that the employees were satisfied with the fairness in hiring of

external candidates in DOT in the pre-corporatisation period.





cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and above. The average score in this case is 62


score indicates that the employees are satisfied with the fairness in hiring of external

candidates in the post-corporatisation period.

17. Recognition for employees’ Contributions

An appealing interest from the part of employees gets only when their

activities are properly recognised and acknowledged. Their ability and task

performance must be taken with due weight.

279





cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 21 respondents (6 per cent) marked a very

high level at cent per cent. The average score in this case is 61 per cent with a


that the employees were satisfied with the recognition for employees’ contributions

by the DOT in the pre-corporatisation period.

The opinion of employees on this sub-variable is given as item number






standard deviation of 18 per cent and a co-variance of 27. The mean score shows that

the employees are satisfied with the recognition for employees’ contributions in the

post-corporatisation period.

18. Recognition for Employee’s Expertise

There are employees in the organisation having good expertise and no

expertise in the task assigned to them. So due recognition must be given to those

having expertise in job and in their performance .

The views of employees on this sub-variable is shown as item number V3.18

of Table 4.11. 39 respondents (11 per cent) marked the level of opinion at 40 per

280

cent and less, whereas 59 respondents (16 per cent) and 134 respondents (36 per





employees were satisfied with the recognition for employees’ expertise in the DOT

in the pre-corporatisation period.

The opinion of employees on this sub-variable is shown as item number V3.18


cent and less, whereas 60 respondents (16 per cent) and 134 respondents (36 per cent)




deviation of 16 per cent and a co-variance of 24. The mean score makes it clear that

the employees are satisfied with the recognition for employees’ expertise in the post-


19. Guidance from Employees’ Supervisor

All employees are not alike, some employees have sufficient capacity to do

the job independently but some other need proper guidance from their supervisory

staff of the organisation. In those cases where the employees need support must be

identified and be provided support by the supervisors concerned.




281





that the employees were satisfied with the guidance from the supervisors in the


The views of employees s on this sub-variable are shown as item number






deviation of 20 per cent and a co-variance of 30. The mean score makes it clear that

employees are satisfied with the guidance from the supervisors in the organisation in

the post-corporatisation period.

20. Feedback on Employees’ Performance

Another important point to be remembered in bettering the level of satisfaction

of employees is the feedback system of evaluating the performance of employees in

the organisation.






282



score indicates that the employees were somewhat satisfied with the feedback system

on employees performance in the organisation during the pre-corporatisation period.

The level of opinions of employees on this sub-variable is shown as item







score indicates that the employees are somewhat satisfied with the feedback system

on employees’ performance in the organisation during the post-corporatisation

period.

283

Tabl

e 4.

11

Mai

n V

aria

ble:

PE

OPL

E D

IME

NSI

ON

(V3)

( It

em N

umbe

r V

3.11

to V

3.20)

(Pri

or to

Cor

pora

tisat

ion)

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Satis

fact

ion

Scor

e St

atis

tics A

ll

020

40

5060

8010

0Pe

rcA

vgSD

C

V

V3.1

1 Su

ppor

t for

pro

fess

iona

l act

iviti

es

No

3027

69

5354

9448

375

57

28

49

%

87

18

1414

2513

100

V3.1

2 H

iring

pra

ctic

es in

the

unit

No

2711

55

9393

906

375

55

22

40

%

73

15

2525

242

100

V3.1

3 C

larit

y of

per

form

ance

crit

eria

N

o 27

115

48

114

146

2437

564

23

36

%

7

04

1330

396

100

V3.1

4 Fa

irnes

s of w

orkl

oad

dist

ribut

ion

No

282

21

7711

610

625

375

60

23

38

%

71

6 21

3128

710

0

V3.1

5 Pr

omot

ion

oppo

rtuni

ty

No

3923

56

6911

177

037

551

23

46

%

10

615

18

3021

010

0

V3.1

6 Fa

irnes

s of h

iring

ext

erna

l can

dida

tes

No

246

31

8112

999

537

558

21

36

%

6

28

2234

261

100

V3.1

7 R

ecog

nitio

n fo

r em

ploy

ees’

co

ntrib

utio

ns

No

237

17

8211

311

221

375

61

22

37

%

62

5 22

3030

610

0

V3.1

8 R

ecog

nitio

n fo

r em

ploy

ees’

exp

ertis

e N

o 21

018

59

134

123

2037

563

21

34

%

6

05

1636

335

100

V3.1

9 G

uida

nce

from

em

ploy

ees’

supe

rvis

or.

No

2911

27

7111

710

119

375

58

24

41

%

83

7 19

3127

510

0

V3.2

0 Fe

edba

ck o

n em

ploy

ees’

per

form

ance

N

o 23

2280

81

9357

1937

553

23

43

%

6

621

22

2515

510

0So

urce

: SPS

S O

ut P

ut o

f Prim

ary

Dat

a

284

Tabl

e 4.

12

Mai

n V

aria

ble:

PE

OPL

E D

IME

NSI

ON

(V3)

( It

em N

umbe

r V

3.11

to V

3.20)

(Pos

t-C

orpo

ratis

atio

n)

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Stat

istic

s All

0

2040

50

6080

100

Perc

A

vgSD

CV

V3.1

1 Su

ppor

t for

pro

fess

iona

l act

iviti

es

No

027

69

5355

9477

375

65

25

38

%

07

18

1415

2521

100

V3.1

2 H

iring

pra

ctic

es in

the

unit

No

011

55

9393

9330

375

62

19

31

%

03

15

2525

258

100

V3.1

3 C

larit

y of

per

form

ance

crit

eria

N

o 0

115

49

114

146

5037

571

17

24

%

0

04

1330

3913

100

V3.1

4 Fa

irnes

s of w

orkl

oad

dist

ribut

ion

No

02

21

7711

610

653

375

68

18

27

%

01

6 21

3128

1410

0

V3.1

5 Pr

omot

ion

oppo

rtuni

ty

No

1623

59

7212

580

037

554

20

36

%

4

616

19

3321

010

0

V3.1

6 Fa

irnes

s of h

iring

ext

erna

l can

dida

tes

No

16

33

8513

411

06

375

62

15

25

%

02

9 23

3629

210

0

V3.1

7 R

ecog

nitio

n fo

r em

ploy

ees’

co

ntrib

utio

ns

No

07

17

8211

311

244

375

67

18

27

%

02

5 22

3030

1210

0

V3.1

8 R

ecog

nitio

n fo

r em

ploy

ees’

exp

ertis

e N

o 0

018

60

134

124

3937

568

16

24

%

0

05

1636

3310

100

V3.1

9 G

uida

nce

from

em

ploy

ees’

supe

rvis

or.

No

311

27

7111

710

640

375

65

20

30

%

13

7 19

3128

1110

0

V3.2

0 Fe

edba

ck o

n em

ploy

ees’

per

form

ance

N

o 0

2380

81

9462

3537

558

20

35

%

0

621

22

2517

910

0So

urce

: SPS

S O

ut P

ut o

f Prim

ary

Dat

a

285

21. Authority to Make employees’ Decisions

The decisions are taken by the management on all matters connected to the

organisation. There are instances where employees are participated in taking

decisions on matters relating them. The informations regarding the authority to make

employees’ decision are examined and opinion is gathered to know the extent of

authority given to employees in decision making process.

The level of opinions of employees on this sub-variable is shown as item




respondents (9 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and none of them marked a



employees were not satisfied with the extent of authority given to make decision

during the pre-corporatisation period.

The opinion of employees on this sub-variable is given as item number






indicates that the employees are not satisfied with the authority to make employees’

decision during the post-corporatisation period also.

286

22. Availability of Mentoring

Opinion is collected on the process of mentoring also. The opinion of

employees on this sub-variable is given as item number V3.22 of Table 4.13. 34

respondents (9 per cent) marked the level of opinion at 40 per cent and less, whereas

46 respondents (12 per cent) and 131 respondents (35 per cent) marked a level

between 50 and 60 per cent. But 138 respondents (37 per cent) marked a level at

80 per cent and 26 respondents (7 per cent) marked a level at cent per cent. The


co-variance of 34. The mean score clearly indicates that the employees were

satisfied with the mentoring process of the organisation during the pre-


The opinions of employees on this sub-variable is given as item number




cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 38 respondents (10 per cent) marked a level

at cent per cent. The average score in this case is 70 per cent with a standard

deviation of 16 per cent and a co-variance of 22. The mean score clearly indicates

that the employees are very much satisfied with the mentoring process of the

organisation during the post-corporatisation period.

23. Relationship with Senior Administrators

The opinion on the employees’ relationship with the senior administrators of the

organization is collected to know the climate exist in the organisation among superior

and subordinates. The opinions of employees on this sub-variable are depicted as

287

item number V3.23 of Table 4.13. 57 respondents (15per cent) marked the level of


respondents (32 per cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent. Again 119

respondents (32 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and only 8 respondents (2



reveals that there existed a good relationship with senior administrators by employees

of DOT during the pre-corporatisation period.

The opinion of employees on this sub-variable is given as item number V3.23






per cent and a co-variance of 26. The mean score reveals that there exists a good

relationship with senior administrators by employees during the post-corporatisation

period as well.

24. Leadership in Employees’ Unit

Leaders are needed in every organisation for leading the employees in a way

to achieve the organisational goals. Better performance is possible provided there

exists leaders with good quality and personality and it in turn leads the employees to

follow their paths and take them as role models.


V3.24 of Table 4.13. 198 respondents (52 per cent) marked the level of opinion at

288

40 per cent and less, whereas 86 respondents (23 per cent) and 79 respondents (21

per cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent. But only 12 respondents (3 per

cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and none of them marked a level of above 80 per

cent. The average score in this case is 40 per cent with a standard deviation of 19 per

cent and a co-variance of 47. The mean marked level shows that there was no

leadership in employees’ unit in DOT in the pre-corporatisation period.

The opinions of employees on this sub-variable are given as item number


40 per cent and less, whereas 88 respondents (23 per cent) and 93 respondents (25

per cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent. But only 18 respondents (5 per



cent and a co-variance of 38. The mean marked level shows that there is no

leadership in employees’ unit in the post-corporatisation period.

25. Pressure Feeling to Perform

There are cases where there is a need for application of pressure tactics by

leaders or managers of the organisation to make the employees engage in the work.

The superiors are not applying the pressure for performance, sometimes they do not

carry out their operations promptly.



40 per cent and less, whereas 80 respondents (21 per cent) marked a level between

50 and none of them marked a level at 60 per cent. But only 9 respondents (2 per


289


cent and a co-variance of 52. The low level of mean score reveals that there was no

pressure feeling to perform the tasks in DOT in the pre-corporatisation period.



per cent and less, whereas 93 respondents (25 per cent) marked a level between 50

and none of them marked a level at 60 per cent. But only 13 respondents (3 per



cent and a co-variance of 45. The low level of mean score reveals that there is no

pressure feeling to perform the tasks in the post-corporatisation period.

26. Degree of Freedom

Another important variable which determines the level of satisfaction of

employees in the organisation is the degree of freedom allowed to them in performing

the tasks entrusted to them. The greater the freedom given to them the higher the

productivity and the better the satisfaction.

The opinions of employees on degree of freedom given as item number V3.26

of Table 4.13. 35 respondents (9 per cent) marked the level of opinion at 40 per cent

and less, whereas 50 respondents (13 per cent) and 116 respondents (31 per cent)

marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent respectively. But 152 respondents (41

per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 22 respondents (6 per cent) marked a very

high level cent per cent. The average score in this case is 65 per cent with a

standard deviation of 22 per cent and a co-variance of 33. A very high mean score

290

reveals that the employees of DOT enjoyed a very high freedom in the pre-


The opinion of employees on degree of freedom is shown as item number



cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent respectively. But 157 respondents

(42 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 33 respondents (9 per cent) marked a

very high level cent per cent. The average score in this case is 69 per cent with a

standard deviation of 16 per cent and a co-variance of 23. A very high mean score

shows that the degree of freedom enjoyed by the employees is very high in the post-


27. Preference for Job to Salary

Salary is the basic condition now the people prefer for jobs. Now in the

present time the people seek employment depending upon the salary and not the task

assigned to them.




per cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent respectively. But 143


cent) marked a very high level cent per cent. The average score in this case is 65 per


score reveals that there was high preference for job to salary in DOT in pre-


291








that there is high preference for job to salary exists in post-corporatisation period.

28. Degree of Trust and Confidence

Another most important factor responsible for the level of satisfaction of

employees is the degree of trust and confidence vested on them. The organisation and

the leaders of the organisation must trust upon the employees and confident about

their performance tasks .








that there was high degree of trust and confidence among employees in pre-




292






that the degree of trust and confidence is very great in the post-corporatisation

period.

29. Comfort with the Operator

Comfort with the operator is another important factor looked into for

checking the level of satisfaction of employees of DOT. The opinions of employees

on this sub-variable is shown as item number V3.29 of Table 4.13. 79 respondents

(21 per cent) marked the level of opinion at 40 per cent and less, whereas 111


50 and 60 per cent respectively. But 79 respondents ( 21 per cent) marked a level at

80 per cent and none of them marked a level at cent per cent. The average score in


35. The mean score reveals that the employees of DOT were satisfied in comfort

with operator in the pre-corporatisation period.




per cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent respectively. But 95

respondents (25per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and none of them marked a


293


comfort with the operator is high in the post-corporatisation period.

30. Satisfaction with Salary The opinions on the level of satisfaction of employees of DOT on the salary

given in both the pre and post corporatisation period are enquired into. The opinions

of employees on satisfaction with salary is given as item number V3.30 of Table

4.13. 167 respondents (45 per cent) marked the level of opinion at 40 per cent and

less, whereas 83 respondents (22 per cent) and 55 respondents (15 per cent) marked

a level between 50 and 60 per cent respectively. But 55 respondents (15per cent)

marked a level at 80 per cent and 15 respondents (4 per cent) marked a level at

cent per cent. The average score in this case is 50 per cent with a standard deviation

of 22 per cent and a co-variance of 43. The mean score reveals that the employees

of DOT were satisfied with the salary given to them in the pre-corporatisation period.

The opinion of employees on satisfaction with salary is given as item



respondents (15 per cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent respectively.

But 62 respondents (17per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 25 respondents (7

per cent) marked a level at cent per cent. The average score in this case is 55 per


score reveals that the employees are satisfied with the salary given to them in the

post-corporatisation period as well.

294

Tabl

e 4.

13

Mai

n V

aria

ble:

PE

OPL

E D

IME

NSI

ON

(V3)

( It

em N

umbe

r V

3.21

to V

3.30)

(Pri

or to

Cor

pora

tisat

ion)

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Stat

istic

s All

0

2040

50

6080

100

Perc

Avg

SD

C

V

V3.2

1 A

utho

rity

to m

ake

empl

oyee

s’

deci

sion

s N

o 22

9891

74

5634

037

541

21

50

%

6

2624

20

159

010

0

V3.2

2 A

vaila

bilit

y of

Men

torin

g N

o 22

012

46

131

138

2637

565

22

34

%

6

03

1235

377

100

V3.2

3 R

elat

ions

hip

with

seni

or a

dmin

istra

tors

N

o 29

424

72

119

119

837

559

22

38

%

8

16

1932

322

100

V3.2

4 Le

ader

ship

in e

mpl

oyee

s’ u

nit

No

2490

84

8679

120

375

40

19

47

%

624

22

2321

30

100

V3.2

5 Pr

essu

re fe

elin

g to

per

form

N

o 21

174

91

800

90

375

32

16

52

%

646

24

210

20

100

V3.2

6 D

egre

e of

free

dom

N

o 20

411

50

116

152

2237

565

22

33

%

5

13

1331

416

100

V3.2

7 Pr

efer

ence

for j

ob to

sala

ry

No

203

8 49

127

143

2537

565

21

33

%

5

12

1334

387

100

V3.2

8 D

egre

e of

trus

t and

con

fiden

ce

No

2359

84

3863

9513

375

51

25

50

%

616

22

1017

253

100

V3.2

9 C

omfo

rt w

ith th

e op

erat

or

No

214

54

111

106

790

375

55

19

35

%

61

14

3028

210

100

V3.3

0 Sa

tisfa

ctio

n w

ith sa

lary

N

o 22

1413

1 83

5555

1537

550

22

43

%

6

435

22

1515

410

0So

urce

: SPS

S O

ut P

ut o

f Prim

ary

Dat

a

295

Tabl

e 4.

14

Mai

n V

aria

ble:

PE

OPL

E D

IME

NSI

ON

(V3)

(Ite

m N

umbe

r V

3.21

to V

3.30)

(Pos

t-C

orpo

ratis

atio

n)

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Satis

fact

ion

Scor

e St

atis

tics A

ll

020

40

5060

8010

0Pe

rcA

vg

SD

CV

V3.2

1 A

utho

rity

to m

ake

empl

oyee

s’ d

ecis

ions

N

o 3

9893

76

5945

137

545

20

44

%

1

2625

20

1612

010

0

V3.2

2 A

vaila

bilit

y of

Men

torin

g N

o 0

012

47

136

142

3837

570

16

22

%

0

03

1336

3810

100

V3.2

3 R

elat

ions

hip

with

seni

or a

dmin

istra

tors

N

o 2

424

72

119

135

1937

565

17

26

%

1

16

1932

365

100

V3.2

4 Le

ader

ship

in e

mpl

oyee

s’ u

nit

No

091

85

8893

180

375

44

17

38

%

024

23

2325

50

100

V3.2

5 Pr

essu

re fe

elin

g to

per

form

N

o 1

175

93

930

130

375

34

16

45

%

047

25

250

30

100

V3.2

6 D

egre

e of

free

dom

N

o 0

411

52

118

157

3337

569

16

23

%

0

13

1431

429

100

V3.2

7 Pr

efer

ence

for j

ob to

sala

ry

No

03

8 51

127

147

3937

570

16

23

%

0

12

1434

3910

100

V3.2

8 D

egre

e of

trus

t and

con

fiden

ce

No

060

84

4167

105

1837

556

23

41

%

0

1622

11

1828

510

0

V3.2

9 C

omfo

rt w

ith th

e op

erat

or

No

04

56

112

108

950

375

59

14

25

%

01

15

3029

250

100

V3.3

0 Sa

tisfa

ctio

n w

ith sa

lary

N

o 0

1413

1 85

5862

2537

555

19

35

%

0

435

23

1517

710

0So

urce

: SPS

S O

ut P

ut o

f Prim

ary

Dat

a

296

31. Company Benefits and Retirement Plans

Another important variable which determines the level of satisfaction of

employees is the benefits given to employees during the course of work and in times

of retirement. The opinion of employees on this sub-variable is shown as item



respondents (7 per cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent respectively. But

68 respondents (18per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and none of them marked

a level at cent per cent. The average score in this case is 43 per cent with a standard


employees of DOT were not satisfied with the benefits and retirement plans in the






(22 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and none of them marked a level at cent


per cent and a co-variance of 44. The mean score reveals that the employees are

not satisfied with the company benefits and retirement plans in the post-


32. Relationship with Colleagues

The atmosphere in the organisation especially in the matter of co-operation

and co-ordination of workers in the organisation is important for creating a friendly

297

work environment. The co-operative relationship exists in the organization is enquired

into.



per cent and less, whereas 71 respondents (19 per cent) and 80 respondents (21per

cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent respectively. But a large number,




mean score reveals that the employees maintained a cordial relationship with their

colleagues during the pre-corporatisation period.








mean score reveals that the employees maintain a cordial relationship with their

colleagues during the post-corporatisation period.

33. Sense of Team Work

The employees attitude towards working with team is yet another variable

taken for knowing the level of satisfaction of employees of the organization. The

opinions of employees on this sub-variable are shown as item number V3.33 of


298

and less, whereas 20 respondents (5 per cent) and 12 respondents (3per cent) marked

a level between 50 and 60 per cent respectively. But a large number, 105




score reveals that there existed a sense of team work among employees in the

organisation during the pre-corporatisation period.








mean score reveals that there exists a sense of team work among employees in

organisation during the post-corporatisation period.

34. Supervisor Keeps Employee Informed

The supervisor informs the employees about their performance effectiveness.

The opinions of employees on this sub-variable is given as item number V3.34 of


and less, whereas 33 respondents (9 per cent) and 15 respondents (4 per cent) marked

a level between 50 and 60 per cent respectively. But a large number, 111



per cent with a standard deviation of 29 per cent and a co-variance of 49. The

299

mean score indicates that there existed an efficient system for the information of all

matters related to employees during the pre-corporatisation period.



per cent and less, whereas 33 respondents (9 per cent) and 15 respondents (4 per cent)

marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent respectively. But a large number, 114



per cent with a standard deviation of 25 per cent and a co-variance of 38. The

mean score indicates that the system of information is efficient during the post-

corporatisation period also.

35. Severity of Staff Turnover

Staff turnover is one of the important problems faced by the public sector

undertakings in Kerala. Most often they engage in other jobs for getting higher

amounts by taking leave in the present jobs. This turnover problem generally affects

the organisation and the opinion of employees towards the extent of issue in the

organisation is enquired.




cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent respectively. But none of them



indicates that the turnover of employees in DOT was not a serious problem during


300




cent) marked a level between 50 and 60 per cent respectively. But only one

respondent marked a level at 80 per cent and none of them marked a level at cent per


per cent and a co-variance of 40. The mean score indicates that there is no question

of turnover of employees during the post-corporatisation period as well.

36. Performance Effectiveness

The next important variable taken for evaluating the level of satisfaction of

employees is the level of performance effectiveness attained by them. The opinions of

employees on this sub-variable are given as item number V3.36 of Table 4.15. The

level of opinion at 40 per cent and less is marked by 38 respondents (10 per cent),

whereas 38 respondents (10 per cent) and 75 respondents (20 per cent) marked a

level between 50 and 60 per cent respectively. But 172 respondents ( 46 per cent)

marked a level at 80 per cent and 52respondents (14 per cent) marked a level at cent


per cent and a co-variance of 35. The mean score indicates that there was

performance effectiveness in the organisation during the pre-corporatisation period.





(49 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 62respondents (17 per cent) marked a


301

deviation of 17 per cent and a co-variance of 22. The mean score shows that there

is performance effectiveness in the organisation during the post-corporatisation

period.

37. Satisfaction with Work and Responsibilities

The work of employee is assigned in advance for better fulfilment of their

tasks. Each and every work assigned is having a specific task to be performed with

responsibility. The level of satisfaction on work and responsibilities are enquired into.

The opinions of employees on this sub-variable are depicted as item number V3.37







indicates that there was full satisfaction from the part of employees with work and

responsibilities during the pre-corporatisation period.








indicates that there is full satisfaction from the part of employees with work and

responsibilities during the post-corporatisation period as well.

302

Tabl

e 4.

15

Mai

n V

aria

ble:

PE

OPL

E D

IME

NSI

ON

(V3)

( It

em N

umbe

r V

3.31

to V

3.37)

(Pri

or to

Cor

pora

tisat

ion)

C

ode

Sub-

varia

bles

Sa

tisfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Stat

istic

s All

0

20

40

50

60

80

100

Perc

Avg

SDC

V

V3.3

1 C

ompa

ny b

enef

its a

nd re

tirem

ent p

lans

No

23

84

125

48

27

68

0 37

5 43

22

52

%

6 22

33

13

7

18

0 10

0

V3.3

2 R

elat

ions

hip

with

col

leag

ues

No

23

3 54

71

80

13

410

37

5 59

22

37

%

6 1

14

19

21

36

3 10

0

V3.3

3 Se

nse

of te

amw

ork

No

36

63

102

20

12

105

37

375

51

30

59

%

10

17

27

5 3

28

10

100

V3.3

4 Su

perv

isor

kee

ps e

mpl

oyee

info

rmed

No

26

19

110

33

15

111

61

375

59

29

49

%

7 5

29

9 4

30

16

100

V3.3

5 Se

verit

y of

Sta

ff tu

rnov

er

No

56

36

128

128

27

0 0

375

37

18

49

%

15

10

34

34

7 0

0 10

0

V3.3

6 Pe

rfor

man

ce e

ffec

tiven

ess

No

25

1 12

38

75

17

252

37

5 69

24

35

%

7 0

3 10

20

46

14

10

0

V3.3

7 Sa

tisfa

ctio

n w

ith w

ork

and

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

No

29

9 8

53

111

114

51

375

64

26

40

%

82

2 14

3030

1410

0

Sour

ce: S

PSS

Out

Put

of P

rimar

y D

ata

303

Tabl

e 4.

16

Mai

n V

aria

ble:

PE

OPL

E D

IME

NSI

ON

(V3)

( It

em N

umbe

r V

3.31

to V

3.37)

(Pos

t-C

orpo

ratis

atio

n)

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Stat

istic

s All

0

2040

50

6080

100

Perc

Avg

SDC

V

V3.3

1 C

ompa

ny b

enef

its a

nd re

tirem

ent p

lans

No

084

127

5129

840

375

47

21

44

%

022

34

148

220

100

V3.3

2 R

elat

ions

hip

with

col

leag

ues

No

03

55

7281

147

1737

5

64

17

27

%

01

15

1922

395

100

V3.3

3 Se

nse

of te

amw

ork

No

063

103

2012

109

6837

5

60

28

47

%

017

27

53

2918

100

V3.3

4 Su

perv

isor

kee

ps e

mpl

oyee

info

rmed

No

019

110

3315

114

8437

5

66

25

38

%

05

29

94

3022

100

V3.3

5 Se

verit

y of

Sta

ff tu

rnov

er

No

3337

132

138

341

037

5

40

16

40

%

910

35

379

00

100

V3.3

6 Pe

rfor

man

ce e

ffec

tiven

ess

No

01

12

3977

184

6237

5

75

17

22

%

00

3 10

2149

1710

0

V3.3

7 Sa

tisfa

ctio

n w

ith w

ork

and

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

No

09

8 53

115

119

7137

571

19

27

%

0

22

1431

3219

100

Sour

ce: S

PSS

Out

Put

of P

rimar

y D

ata

304

III. MAIN VARIABLE – TECHNOLOGICAL DIMENSION (V4)

The satisfaction level of employees belong to the BSNL are analysed by

taking into account the main variable Technological Dimension. In this case 10 sub-

variables identified for assessing the level of satisfaction of employees in the prior

and post-corporatisation are analysed in the paragraphs noted below:

1. Process used by the Firm

The process used by the firm is yet another variable used for knowing the

level of satisfaction of employees. The simple the process used, the more the level of

satisfaction of employees.






cent) marked a very high level of cent per cent. The average score in this case is 59


score reveals that the respondents viewed that they were satisfied with the process

used by DOT in the pre-corporatisation period.

The views of employees on this sub-variable is given as item number V4.1 of

Table 4.18. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and less is marked by 44 respondents

(12 per cent), whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 87

respondents (23 per cent) and 94 respondents (25 per cent) respectively. But a

majority, 106 respondents (28 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 44

respondents (12 per cent) marked a very high level of cent per cent. The average score

305


of 29. The mean score reveals that the respondents viewed that they are more

satisfied with the process used by the organisation in the post-corporatisation period

than before .

2. Research and Development Intensity

Next important variable considered for knowing the level of satisfaction of

employees is the research and development intensity. The research and development

is very important for enhancing the service facilities to the customers for improving

the present level of satisfaction.

The views of employees on this sub-variable are given as item number V4.2



46 respondents (12 per cent) and 72 respondents (19 per cent) respectively. But a

large majority, 146 respondents (39 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 73



of 39. The mean score reveals that the respondents viewed that the intensity of

research and development in the organisation was high during the pre-corporatisation

period.





large majority, 150 respondents (40 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 98

306



of 23. The mean score reveals that the respondents opined that intensity of research

and development in the organisation is higher during the post-corporatisation

period.

3. Innovation Programmes

Programmes developed must be innovative. Then only there is attraction from

customers. So, what all programmes introduced by the competitor need to be

reviewed and similar / better programmes need to be introduced by the DOT too.

The opinions of employees on this sub-variable are presented as item


88 respondents (24 per cent), whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels are


respectively. But 80 respondents (21 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 31



of 46. The mean score reveals that the programmes introduced by DOT were

innovative ones during the pre-corporatisation period.

The views of employees on this sub-variable are depicted as item number






307


score reveals that the programmes introduced by BSNL are innovative ones during the

post-corporatisation period as well.

4. Low Cost Technology

Another variable used for assessing the satisfaction level of employees is the

technology and its cost. The point to be remembered in the case of technology

application is the cost, because the firm usually implement a kind of technology in

which the cost of it is affordable.

The views of employees s on this sub-variable are given as item number




large majority 120 respondents (32 per cent) marked a very high level at 80 per cent

and at 100 per cent by 67 respondents (18 per cent). The average score in this case is


mean score reveals that the technology implemented was low cost during the pre-


The Opinions of employees on this sub-variable are shown as item number




large majority of the respondents (123) (33 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent

(33 per cent) and 105 respondents ( 28 per cent) marked a level at 100 per cent .


308

and a co-variance of 27. The mean score reveals that the technology in force is low

cost during the post-corporatisation period as well.

5. Adaptability

Adaptability is another point which affects the satisfaction level of employees.

The technology which is adaptable only be adopted because sometimes the

employees are not trained enough to use a technology which is new .




58 respondents (15 per cent) and 110 respondents (29 per cent) respectively. But


per cent) marked a very high level of cent per cent. The average score in this case is


mean score reveals that the DOT had the capacity of adaptability during the pre-









score reveals that the BSNL has the capacity to adapt the technology of the M NCs

during the post-corporatisation period.

309

6. Compatibility

Compatibility is yet another variable examined for knowing the level of

satisfaction of employees in the organisation. The opinions of employees on this sub-

variable are shown as item number V4.6 of Table 4.17. The level of opinion at 40

per cent and less is marked by 173 respondents (47 per cent), whereas between 50

and 60 per cent levels are marked by 77 respondents (21 per cent) and 46

respondents (12 per cent) respectively. But 64 respondents (17 per cent) marked a

level at 80 per cent and 15 respondents (4 per cent) marked a very high level of cent


per cent and a co-variance of 49. The mean score reveals that the compatibility of

DOT was not so satisfactory during the pre-corporatisation period.








score reveals that the BSNL now has the power of compatibility in the post-


7. Specialisation in Job There are employees of both specialised and not specialised in certain fields.

Specialisation is important for improving their level of knowledge in effective

performance of the tasks assigned to them.

310

The views of employees on this sub-variable are presented as item number







score reveals that the programmes introduced by DOT increased the specialisation in

job in the pre-corporatisation period.

The opinion of employee on this sub-variable is shown as item number

V4.7 of able 4.18. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and less is marked by 101






score reveals that the programmes introduced by BSNL increase the specialisation in

jobs in the post-corporatisation period as well.

8. Enjoyment in Working

A satisfied worker means those who are enjoying the work and the work

environment. For that the employer should provide proper environment and working

conditions so that the workers do their job by enjoying the work.

The views of employees on this sub-variable is shown as item number


311






score reveals that the employees had been enjoying their job during the pre-


The opinion of employee on this sub-variable is given as item number V4.8







score reveals that the employees are enjoying the job in the post-corporatisation

period as well.

9. Reliability on Subscribers’ Interests

In every case customers depend on the employees of the organisation for

various uses. The employees also act according to the specifications of the customer.

In this case customers interest consideration is the prime criterion as far as employees

are concerned .




312





score reveals that the employees worked on reliability on subscribers’ interest in the









score reveals that the workers engage tasks based on the reliability on subscribers’

interest in the post-corporatisation period as well.

10. Professional Competence

The satisfaction of employees basically depends on performance of tasks in an

efficient manner for satisfying both customers and the owners. It is made possible

only when they are professionally competent to perform the task.

The views of employees on this sub-variable is given as item number



55 respondents (15 per cent) and 113 respondents (30 per cent) respectively. But


313



mean score reveals that the employees were professionally competent in the pre-




respondents (3 per cent). And none of them recorded a level at 20 per cent and less,

whereas between 50 and 60 per cent is marked by 56 respondents (15 per cent) and

114 respondents (30 per cent) respectively. But 153 respondents (41 per cent)




employees of BSNL are professionally competent to do the task in the post-

corporatisation period as well.

314

Tabl

e 4.

17

Mai

n V

aria

ble:

TE

CH

NO

LO

GIC

AL

DIM

EN

SIO

N (

V4)

( It

em N

umbe

r V

4.1 t

o V

4.10)

(Pri

or to

Cor

pora

tisat

ion)

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Stat

istic

s All

0

2040

50

60

8010

0Pe

rc

Avg

SD

C

V

V4.1

Pr

oces

s use

d by

the

Firm

N

o 29

338

85

90

9931

375

59

24

41

%

81

10

23

2426

810

0

V4.2

R

esea

rch

and

deve

lopm

ent i

nten

sity

N

o 32

15

46

7214

673

375

69

27

39

%

90

1 12

19

3919

100

V4.3

In

nova

tion

prog

ram

mes

N

o 36

1042

85

91

8031

375

56

26

46

%

103

11

23

2421

810

0

V4.4

Lo

w c

ost t

echn

olog

y N

o 43

126

62

56

120

6737

564

29

46

%

11

07

17

1532

1810

0

V4.5

A

dapt

abili

ty

No

234

14

58

110

131

3537

564

23

36

%

6

14

15

2935

910

0

V4.6

C

ompa

tibili

ty

No

2255

96

77

4664

1537

548

24

49

%

6

1526

21

12

174

100

V4.7

Sp

ecia

lisat

ion

in jo

b N

o 30

1873

88

11

934

1337

550

22

43

%

8

519

23

32

93

100

V4.8

En

joym

ent i

n w

orki

ng

No

3017

51

93

9773

1437

554

23

43

%

8

514

25

26

194

100

V4.9

R

elia

bilit

y on

subs

crib

ers’

inte

rest

s N

o 33

2238

93

98

7219

375

54

24

45

%

96

10

25

2619

510

0

V4.1

0 Pr

ofes

sion

al c

ompe

tenc

e N

o 28

012

55

11

314

819

375

63

23

36

%

70

3 15

30

395

100

Sour

ce: S

PSS

Out

Put

of P

rimar

y D

ata

315

Tabl

e 4.

18

Mai

n V

aria

ble:

TE

CH

NO

LO

GIC

AL

DIM

EN

SIO

N (

V4)

( It

em N

umbe

r V

4.1 t

o V

4.10)

(Pos

t-C

orpo

ratis

atio

n )

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Stat

istic

s All

0

2040

50

6080

100

Perc

Avg

SD

CV

V4.1

Pr

oces

s use

d by

the

Firm

N

o 0

341

87

9410

644

375

66

19

29

%

01

11

2325

2812

100

V4.2

R

esea

rch

and

deve

lopm

ent i

nten

sity

N

o 0

17

4772

150

9837

577

18

23

%

0

02

1319

4026

100

V4.3

In

nova

tion

prog

ram

mes

N

o 0

1042

86

9882

5737

565

20

32

%

0

311

23

2622

1510

0

V4.4

Lo

w c

ost t

echn

olog

y N

o 0

126

63

5712

310

537

575

20

27

%

0

07

1715

3328

100

V4.5

A

dapt

abili

ty

No

04

16

6111

513

841

375

69

17

25

%

01

4 16

3137

1110

0

V4.6

C

ompa

tibili

ty

No

059

100

7948

6920

375

52

22

42

%

016

27

2113

185

100

V4.7

Sp

ecia

lisat

ion

in jo

b N

o 4

1978

90

127

3720

375

55

18

33

%

15

21

2434

105

100

V4.8

En

joym

ent i

n w

orki

ng

No

118

52

9610

175

3237

560

20

33

%

0

514

26

2720

910

0

V4.9

R

elia

bilit

y on

subs

crib

ers’

inte

rest

s N

o 0

2240

95

101

8136

375

61

20

33

%

06

11

2527

2210

100

V4.1

0 Pr

ofes

sion

al c

ompe

tenc

e N

o 0

012

56

114

153

4037

570

16

23

%

0

03

1530

4111

100

Sour

ce: S

PSS

Out

Put

of P

rimar

y D

ata

316

IV. MAIN VARIABLE – PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT

DIMENSION (V5)

The satisfaction level of employees belongs to the BSNL are analysed by

taking into account the planning and management dimension. In this case 11 sub-

variables are identified for assessing the level of satisfaction of employees of the

organisation in the prior and post-corporatisation period which are analysed in the

foregoing paragraphs:

1. Long Term Objectives

Every organisation fix in advance the objectives to be fulfilled. The task of

achieving the objectives is vested with the performance of the employees. They

perform well when they are satisfied with the long term objectives set by the

organisation.

The opinion of employees on long term objectives in the pre-corporatisation

era is depicted as item number V5.1 of Table 4.19. 63 respondents (18 per cent)

marked level of opinion at 40 per cent and less, whereas between 50 and 60 per cent

levels are marked by 90 respondents (24 per cent) and 69 respondents (18 per cent)

respectively. Majority of the respondents, 122 respondents (33 per cent) marked a

level at 80 per cent and 31 respondents (8 per cent) marked a very high level of


of 24 per cent and a co-variance of 39. The mean score reveals that the DOT had

fixed the long term objectives in a satisfactory manner in the pre-corporatisation

period.

The views of employees on long term objectives in the post-corporatisation

era are shown as item number V5.1 of Table 4.20. 44 respondents (12 per cent)

317


is marked by 100 respondents (27 per cent) and 71 respondents (19 per cent)


level at 80 per cent and 34 respondents (9 per cent) marked a very high level of cent


per cent and a co-variance of 29. The mean score reveals that long term objectives of

BSNL are in a satisfactory manner in the post-corporatisation period.

2. Action Plans

Another important variable examined is the action plan. The employees

satisfaction depends on the action plans of the organisation. The opinions of

employees on action plans of the company in the pre-corporatisation era are

presented as item number V5.2 of Table 4.19. 157 respondents (42 per cent) marked

level of opinion at 40 per cent and less, whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels

are marked by 27 respondents (7 per cent) and none of them marked a level at 60 per

cent. Majority of the respondents, 141 respondents (38 per cent) marked a level at

80 per cent and 50 respondents (13 per cent) marked a very high level of cent per


cent and a co-variance of 53. The mean score reveals that the organisation had action

plans in the pre-corporatisation period.

The opinions of employees on action plans in the post-corporatisation era

are presented as item number V5.2 of Table 4.20. 131 respondents (35 per cent)


levels are marked by 28 respondents (7 per cent) and none of them marked a level at

60 per cent. Majority of the respondents, 143 respondents (38 per cent) marked a


318


of 27 per cent and a co-variance of 42. The mean score reveals that they have action

plans in the post-corporatisation period.

3. Short term Objectives

The objectives, both short term and long term, are considered by the employees of

the organisation. The short term objectives are appreciable when they are satisfied

with those objectives. The views of employees on short term objectives during the

pre-corporatisation era are presented as item number V5.3 of Table 4.19. 46

respondents (13 per cent) marked level of opinion at 40 per cent and less, whereas

between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 57 respondents (15per cent) and 121

respondents (32 per cent). Majority of the respondents, 131 respondents (35 per cent)




DOT had fair short term objectives in the pre-corporatisation period.

The views of employees on short term objectives in the post-corporatisation

era are presented as item number V5.3 of Table 4.20. 20 respondents (6 per cent)






of 17 per cent and a co-variance of 25. This high mean score reveals that short term

objectives of BSNL are more appreciable in the post-corporatisation period.

319

4. External Environmental Sensitivity

The company’s sensitivity in analysing the environment for survival and

growth is an important variable considered for evaluating the satisfaction level of

employees.

The opinion of employees on External Environmental Sensitivity during the

pre-corporatisation era is presented as item number V5.4 of Table 4.19. 44


between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 62 respondents (17per cent) and 128

respondents (34 per cent) respectively. Majority of the respondents, 114 respondents


very high level of cent per cent. The average score in this case is 62 per cent with a

standard deviation of 24 per cent and a co-variance of 38. The mean score reveals that

there existed the system of external environmental sensitivity in the pre-


The opinion of employees on external environmental sensitivity in the post-

corporatisation era is given as item number V5.4 of Table 4.20. 14 respondents (3

per cent) marked level of opinion at 40 per cent and less, whereas between 50 and

60 per cent levels are marked by 63 respondents (17 per cent) and 130 respondents

(35 per cent). Majority of the respondents, 118 respondents (31 per cent) marked a



of 17 per cent and a co-variance of 25. This high mean score reveals that there exists

external environmental sensitivity in the post-corporatisation period also.

320

5. Planning Flexibility

The next important variable, taken for knowing the level of satisfaction of

employees is the planning flexibility. The concern should prepare the plans not in a

rigid manner, it must be flexible enough to account for the changes occur from time to

time.

The opinions of employees on planning flexibility during the pre-

corporatisation era are shown as item number V5.5 of Table 4.19. 203 respondents

(54 per cent) marked level of opinion at 40 per cent and less, whereas between 50

and 60 per cent levels are marked by 40 respondents (11per cent) and 71 respondents

(19 per cent). 45 respondents (12 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 16



of 54. The mean score reveals that there had been no planning flexibility in DOT in


The opinions of employees on planning flexibility in the post-corporatisation

era are presented as item number V5.5 of Table 4.20. 180 respondents (48 per cent)


levels are marked by 40 respondents (11 per cent) and 72 respondents (19 per cent).



51 per cent with a standard deviation of 24 per cent and a co-variance of 47. This

high mean score reveals that there is planning flexibility in the post-corporatisation

period than before.

321

6. Quantum of Employees’ Input in Decision Making

Decision making is usually done by the top level authorities. But there are

instances where employees in the organisation are also involved in the process of

decision making. In any case such an opportunity is being given, the employees’

level of satisfaction becomes more.

The opinions of employees on the quantum of employees’ input in decision

making are presented as item number V5.6 of Table 4.19. 38 respondents (10 per

cent) marked level of opinion at 40 per cent and less, whereas between 50 and 60 per

cent levels are marked by 51 respondents (14 per cent) and 120 respondents (32 per

cent). Majority of the respondents, 116 respondents (31 per cent) marked a level at

80 per cent and 50 respondents (13per cent) marked a very high level of cent per cent.


and a co-variance of 38. The mean score reveals that the quantum of employees’

input in decision making was very high in the pre-corporatisation period.

The views of employees on Quantum of employees’ input in decision making

during the post-corporatisation era are presented as item number V5.6 of Table

4.20. The level of opinion at 40 per cent and less is marked by only 11 respondents

(3 per cent), whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 51 respondents

(14 per cent) and 121 respondents (32 per cent). Majority of the respondents, 117



per cent with a standard deviation of 18 per cent and a co-variance of 25. A very

high mean score gives a clear picture that in the decision making process the

employees are given due share in the post-corporatisation period.

322

7. Pay Parity

Next important variable which determine the level of satisfaction of employees is

the parity in their pay scales. The same pay for same level of activity is appreciable

but certain instances reveal that there exists different pay scale for same level of

employment . This worsen the employees’ satisfaction. The case of DOT and BSNL

are examined.


V5.7 of Table 4.19. 66 respondents (18 per cent) marked level of opinion at 40 per

cent and less, whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 67

respondents (18 per cent) and 111 respondents (30 per cent). Majority of the

respondents, 127 respondents (34 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and only 4



of 38. The mean score reveals that the pay parity was appreciable in the pre-


The opinion of employees on this sub-variable is shown as item number V5.7

of Table 4.20. Only 36 respondents (10 per cent) marked level of opinion at 40 per



respondents, 145 respondents (39 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 16



of 25. A very high mean score gives a clear picture that the pay parity is appreciable

in the post-corporatisation period also.

323

8. Working Relationship

The relationship among employees and with their superiors in the organisation

is important for increasing the level of satisfaction of employees. The type of

relationship exists among them and with their superiors in DOT and BSNL are

examined.

The views of employees on the sub-variable are presented as item number




respondents, 131 respondents (35 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 17



of 59. The mean score reveals that there existed working relationship in the

organisation during the pre-corporatisation period.




36 respondents (10 per cent) and 15 respondents (4 per cent) respectively. Majority

of the respondents, 145 respondents (39 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and

45 respondents (12 per cent) marked a very high level of cent per cent. The average


variance of 43. This mean score gives a clear picture that there is proper working

relationship in the post-corporatisation period.

324

9. Sense of Common Purpose

The workers must think for attainment of a common purpose those who are

working with a sense of common purpose increase the level of satisfaction of

employees . The opinions of employees on the sub-variable is presented as item

number V5.9 of Table 4.19. 196 respondents (52 per cent) marked level of opinion at

40 per cent and less, whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 41

respondents (11 per cent) and 93 respondents (25per cent). 38 respondents (10 per


high level of cent per cent. The average score in this case is 45 per cent with a


that the sense of common purpose was very less during the pre-corporatisation

period.


of Table 4.20. 172 respondents (46 per cent) marked level of opinion at 40 per cent

and less, whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 41 respondents (11

per cent) and 95 respondents (25 per cent) respectively. 44 respondents (12 per cent)



deviation of 21 per cent and a co-variance of 42. This mean score gives a clear

picture that there is a sense of common purpose in the post-corporatisation period

than before.

10. Caring

The employees think about the attitude of management for caring them. In any

case the owners’ and managers’ caring attitude increases the level of satisfaction and

develop a sense of confidence on the employees.

325

The views of employees on the sub-variable are presented as item number



respondents (10 per cent) and 32 respondents (9 per cent). None of them recorded a

level at 80 per cent and only 10 respondents (3 per cent) marked a level at cent per


cent and a co-variance of 61. The mean score reveals that there was no caring

attitude in the pre-corporatisation period.


V5.10 of Table 4.20. The marked level of opinion at 40 per cent and less by 265


40 respondents (11 per cent) and 32 respondents (9 per cent). None of them recorded

a level at 80 per cent and 38 respondents (10 per cent) marked a very high level of


of 24 per cent and a co-variance of 60. This mean score gives a clear picture that

there is no caring attitude in the post-corporatisation period.

11. Transparency in Pricing Policies

Now in the era of globalisation, the emphasis is on the transparency in

dealings. It is not an exception in BSNL also. In respect of fixing of prices, the

policies must be transparent in nature.

The views of employees on the sub-variable is given as item number V5.11

of Table 4.19. 27 respondents (7 per cent) marked level of opinion at 40 per cent and

less, whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 45 respondents (12

per cent) and 118 respondents (31per cent). Majority of the respondents, 183

326




score reveals that there was high transparency in pricing policies during the pre-

corporatisation period of DOT.

The opinions of employees on the sub-variable are given as item number

V5.11 of Table 4.20. 5 respondents (1 per cent) marked level of opinion at 40 per cent

and less, whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels are marked by 47 respondents

(13 per cent) and 120 respondents (32 per cent). Majority of the respondents, 199



per cent with a standard deviation of 13 per cent and a co-variance of 18. A very

high mean shows that there is high transparency in pricing policies during the post-


327

Tabl

e 4.

19

Mai

n V

aria

ble:

Pla

nnin

g an

d M

anag

emen

t Dim

ensi

on (V

5) ( I

tem

Num

ber

V5.1

to

V5.1

1) (P

rior

to C

orpo

ratis

atio

n)

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Stat

istic

s All

0

20

4050

6080

100

Perc

Avg

SD

CV

V5.1

Lo

ng te

rm o

bjec

tives

N

o 21

10

3290

6912

231

375

61

24

39

%

63

924

1833

810

0

V5.2

A

ctio

n Pl

ans

No

3049

78

270

141

5037

558

31

53

%

8

13

217

038

1310

0

V5.3

Sh

ort t

erm

obj

ectiv

es

No

266

1457

121

131

2037

562

23

37

%

7

2 4

1532

355

100

V5.4

Ex

tern

al e

nviro

nmen

tal s

ensi

tivity

N

o 30

1 13

6212

811

427

375

62

24

38

%

80

317

3430

710

0

V5.5

Pl

anni

ng fl

exib

ility

N

o 24

83

9640

7145

1637

545

24

54

%

6

22

2611

1912

410

0

V5.6

Q

uant

um o

f em

ploy

ees’

inpu

t in

deci

sion

mak

ing

No

272

951

120

116

5037

565

25

38

%

7

1 2

1432

3113

100

V5.7

Pa

y pa

rity

No

303

3367

111

127

437

559

22

38

%

8

1 9

1830

341

100

V5.8

W

orki

ng re

latio

nshi

p N

o 57

29

9036

1513

117

375

51

30

59

%

158

2410

435

510

0

V5.9

Se

nse

of c

omm

on p

urpo

se

No

2461

11

141

9338

737

545

22

48

%

6

16

3011

2510

210

0

V5.1

0 C

arin

g N

o 39

140

115

3932

010

375

33

20

61

%

1037

31

109

03

100

V5.1

1 Tr

ansp

aren

cy in

pric

ing

polic

ies

No

230

445

118

183

237

565

20

32

%

6

0 1

1231

491

100

S

ourc

e: S

PSS

Out

Put

of P

rimar

y D

ata

328

T

able

4.2

0 M

ain

Var

iabl

e: P

LA

NN

ING

AN

D M

AN

AG

EM

EN

T D

IME

NSI

ON

(V5)

( Ite

m N

umbe

r V

5.1 t

o V

5.11)

(Pos

t-C

orpo

ratis

atio

n )

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Stat

istic

s All

0

20

4050

6080

100

Perc

A

vgSD

C

V

V5.1

Lo

ng te

rm o

bjec

tives

N

o 0

10

3410

071

126

3437

565

19

29

%

0

3 9

2719

349

100

V5.2

A

ctio

n Pl

ans

No

052

79

280

143

7337

565

27

42

%

0

14

217

038

1910

0

V5.3

Sh

ort t

erm

obj

ectiv

es

No

06

1457

122

136

4037

569

17

25

%

0

2 4

1533

3611

100

V5.4

Ex

tern

al e

nviro

nmen

tal s

ensi

tivity

N

o 0

1 13

6313

011

850

375

69

17

25

%

00

317

3531

1310

0

V5.5

Pl

anni

ng fl

exib

ility

N

o 0

84

9640

7255

2837

551

24

47

%

0

22

2611

1915

710

0

V5.6

Q

uant

um o

f em

ploy

ees’

inpu

t in

deci

sion

mak

ing

No

02

951

121

117

7537

572

18

25

%

0

1 2

1432

3120

100

V5.7

Pa

y pa

rity

No

03

3367

111

145

1637

566

16

25

%

0

1 9

1830

394

100

V5.8

W

orki

ng re

latio

nshi

p N

o 14

29

9136

1514

545

375

61

27

43

%

48

2410

439

1210

0

V5.9

Se

nse

of c

omm

on p

urpo

se

No

061

11

141

9544

2337

551

21

42

%

0

16

3011

2512

610

0

V5.1

0 C

arin

g N

o 8

141

116

4032

038

375

40

24

60

%

238

31

119

010

100

V5.1

1 Tr

ansp

aren

cy in

pric

ing

polic

ies

No

00

547

120

199

437

570

13

18

%

0

0 1

1332

531

100

So

urce

: SPS

S O

ut P

ut o

f Prim

ary

Dat

a

329

V. MAIN VARIABLE – OPERATIONAL DIMENSION (V6)

The satisfaction level of employees belong to the BSNL is analysed by

taking into account the dimension of the operations. In this case 6 sub-variables are

identified for assessing the level of satisfaction of employees in the prior and post-

corporatisation period which are analysed in the foregoing paragraphs:

1. Profit Growth

The employees are satisfied with the profit position of the organisation. The

creditor growth in profit goes to the efforts of the employees. So they are more

satisfied with the growth in profit. The views of employees on profit growth in the

pre-corporatisation era are depicted as item number V6.1 of Table 4.21. 35



113 respondents (30 per cent) respectively. Majority of the respondents, 105


cent) marked at cent per cent. The average score in this case is 65 per cent with a


that there was profit growth in the pre corporatization period.

The views of employees on profit growth in the post-corporatisation era are

shown as item number V6.1 of Table 4.22. 63 respondents (16 per cent) marked


are marked by 90 respondents (24 per cent) and 108 respondents (29 per cent)



330


that there is profit growth in the post-corporatisation period.

2. Sales Revenue

The sales is the most important revenue item of every organisation. The

profitability of the organisation purely depends on the revenue generation ability of

the firm. This is made possible because of the effort of the employees to satisfy the

subscribers.

The opinions of employees on sales revenue in the pre-corporatisation era are

given as item number V6.2 of Table 4.21. 59 respondents (16 per cent) marked


are marked by 48 respondents (13 per cent) and 110 respondents (29 per cent)


level at 80 per cent and 40 respondents (11 per cent) marked a level at cent per cent.


and a co-variance of 42. The mean score reveals that there was sales revenue in the


The opinions of employees on sales revenue in the post-corporatisation era

are given as item number V6.2 of Table 4.22. 24 respondents (7 per cent) marked

level of opinion at 40 per cent and less, whereas between 50 and 60 per cent levels are



level at 80 per cent and 55 respondents (15per cent) marked a level at cent per cent.


331

and a co-variance of 25. The mean score reveals that there is high sales revenue in

the post-corporatisation period.

3. Financial Strength

Finance is important for pooling all resources needed by the firm. To meet all

obligations of the creditors in the short and in the long run, finance is adequate. It

also enables them to meet the obligations of the employees fully.

The opinions of respondents on the financial strength in the pre-

corporatisation era are depicted as item number V6.3 of Table 4.21. 68 respondents

(19 per cent) marked level of opinion at 40 per cent and less, whereas between 50

and 60 per cent levels are marked by 81 respondents (22 per cent) and 138

respondents (37 per cent) respectively. Only 88 respondents (24 per cent) marked a



that the company was in good financial strength during the pre-corporatisation

period.

The opinions of employees on financial strength in the post-corporatisation

era are shown as item number V6.3 of Table 4.22. The level of opinion at 40 per

cent and less is marked by 33 respondents (9 per cent), whereas between 50 and 60

per cent levels are marked by 84 respondents (22 per cent) and 149 respondents (40

per cent) respectively. Majority of the respondents, 104 respondents (28 per cent)


per cent. The average score in this case is 61 per cent with a standard deviation of

16 per cent and a co-variance of 27. The mean score reveals that there is adequate

financial strength during the post-corporatisation period.

332

4. Operating Efficiency

Another important variable taken for evaluating the level of satisfaction of

employees in the organisation is the operating efficiency. In most of the public Sector

undertakings they are not able to avail the full operational possibilities. The case of

DOT and BSNL are looked into by collecting the opinions of employees .

The opinions of employees on operating efficiency in the pre corporatization

period are enquired into and the collected views are presented as item number V6.4 of

Table 4.21. 84 respondents (23 per cent) marked level of opinion at 40 per cent and


per cent) and 104 respondents (28 per cent) respectively, whereas 99 respondents

(26 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 21 respondents (6 per cent)

marked a level at cent per cent. The average score in this case is 55 per cent with a


that there was operating efficiency in the pre-corporatisation period.

The opinions of employees on operating efficiency in the post corporatization

era are enquired into and the collected views are presented as item number V6.4 of

Table 4.22. 29 respondents (8 per cent) marked level of opinion at 40 per cent and


per cent) and 109 respondents (29 per cent) respectively, whereas 117 respondents

(31 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and 52 respondents (14 per cent) marked

a level at cent per cent. The average score in this case is 68 per cent with a standard

deviation of 19 per cent and a co-variance of 29. The mean score reveals that there is

high operating efficiency in the post-corporatisation period.

333

5. Performance Stability

The next important variable used for knowing the level of satisfaction of

employees is the performance stability. For assessing the sales revenue generation and

profitability position the performance stability is an important variable and is looked

into.

The opinions of employees on performance stability in the pre-corporatisation

era are shown as item number V6.5 of Table 4.21. 62 respondents (17per cent)



respectively. Majority of the respondents,133 respondents (35 per cent) marked a

level at 80 per cent and only 9 respondents (2 per cent) marked a level at cent per


per cent and a co-variance of 47. The mean score reveals that there is performance

stability in operations in the pre-corporatisation period.

The opinions of employees on performance stability in the post-

corporatisation era are presented as item number V6.5 of Table 4.22. 8

respondents (2 per cent) marked level of opinion at 40 per cent and less and none of

them marked a level at 20 per cent and less, whereas between 50 and 60 per cent



level at 80 per cent and 21 respondents (6 per cent) marked a level at cent per cent.


and a co-variance of 21. The mean score reveals that there is performance stability in

operations during the post-corporatisation period.

334

6. Employee Morale

The morale is the attitude of employees in the organisation. The attitude of the

employees can be changed only when there is motivation. Motivating the employees

for better performance ultimately leads to productivity and morale. The level of

satisfaction of employees on morale is collected and is examined.

The views of employees on employee morale in the pre corporatisation era

are shown as item number V6.6 of Table 4.21. 177 respondents (47 per cent)



respectively. But 60 respondents (16 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and

above. The average score in this case is 45 per cent with a standard deviation of 23

per cent and a co-variance of 50. The mean score reveals that there was less

employee morale in the pre-corporatisation period.

The opinion of employees on employee morale in the post-corporatisation

era is shown as item number V6.6 of Table 4.22. 159 respondents (42 per cent)



respectively, whereas 67 respondents (18 per cent) marked a level at 80 per cent and

above. The average score in this case is 49 per cent with a standard deviation of 20

per cent and a co-variance of 40. The mean score reveals that the employee morale is

somewhat improved in the post-corporatisation period than that of pre-

corporatisation era.

335

Tabl

e 4.

21

Mai

n V

aria

ble:

OPE

RA

TIO

NA

L D

IME

NSI

ON

(V

6) (

Item

Num

ber

V6.1

to

V6.6

) (Pr

ior

to C

orpo

ratis

atio

n)

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Satis

fact

ion

Scor

e St

atis

tics A

ll

0

2040

50

6080

100

Perc

Avg

SD

C

V

V6.1

Pr

ofit

grow

th

No

04

3190

11

310

532

375

65

17

27

%

01

1824

30

289

100

V6.2

Sa

les r

even

ue

No

352

2248

11

011

840

375

62

26

42

%

91

613

29

3111

100

V6.3

Fi

nanc

ial s

treng

th

No

442

2281

13

886

237

5

54

23

43

%

121

622

37

231

100

V6.4

O

pera

ting

effic

ienc

y

No

5710

1767

10

499

2137

5

55

28

52

%

153

518

28

266

100

V6.5

Pe

rfor

man

ce st

abili

ty

No

550

758

11

313

39

375

57

27

47

%

150

215

30

352

100

V6.6

Em

ploy

ee m

oral

e

No

2673

7870

68

591

375

45

23

50

%

719

2119

18

160

100

Sou

rce:

SPS

S O

ut P

ut o

f Prim

ary

Dat

a

336

Tabl

e 4.

22

Mai

n V

aria

ble:

OPE

RA

TIO

NA

L D

IME

NSI

ON

(V

6) (

Item

Num

ber

V6.1

to

V6.6

) (Po

st-C

orpo

ratis

atio

n)

Cod

e Su

b-va

riabl

es

Sa

tisfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Stat

istic

s All

0

2040

5060

80

100

Perc

A

vg

SD

CV

V6.1

Pr

ofit

grow

th

No

284

3190

108

9420

375

58

23

39

%

71

824

29

255

100

V6.2

Sa

les r

even

ue

No

02

2249

116

131

5537

5

70

18

25

%

01

613

31

3515

100

V6.3

Fi

nanc

ial s

treng

th

No

82

2384

149

104

537

5

61

16

27

%

21

622

40

281

100

V6.4

O

pera

ting

effic

ienc

y

No

110

1868

109

117

5237

5

68

19

29

%

03

518

29

3114

100

V6.5

Pe

rfor

man

ce st

abili

ty

No

00

864

123

159

2137

5

69

15

21

%

00

217

33

426

100

V6.6

Em

ploy

ee m

oral

e

No

076

8376

73

661

375

49

20

40

%

020

2220

19

180

100

Sour

ce: S

PSS

Out

Put

of P

rimar

y D

ata

337

Part III: PREDICTOR EQUATION MODEL

From the light of the analysis on the views of employees on the facilities given

by Telecom Sector to protect and safeguard the welfare of the workers of BSNL in

Kerala, now the study proceed with a regression model. The Dependent variable, the

level of job satisfaction of employees before and after corporatisation of DOT, is

systematically expressed as 'V7’ and Independent Variables are: Organisational

Dimension (V2); People Dimension (V3); Technological Dimension (V4); Planning and

Management Dimension (V5); and Operational Dimension (V6). Let (V7) as 'V2’, 'V3',

‘V4', 'V5’ , and 'V6' respectively.

The different combinations of Independent Variable consisting of One (1)

Independent Variable, Two (2) Independent Variables, Three (3) Independent Variables,

Four (4) Independent Variables, Five (5) Independent Variables and Six (6) Independent

Variables are framed. All the Predictor Equations are made on the basis of Combination

Method i.e., nCx Method. Where; n = Total number of Variables ; C = Combination, x

= number of success (variables) in each combination.

In One Variable Predictor Equation, there are Five (5) Combination of Variables

(5C1 = 5); in Two Variable Predictor Equation there are Ten (10) combination of

variables (5C2 = 10); In Three Variable Predictor Equation there are Ten (10)

combination of Variables (5C3= 10); In Four Variable Predictor Equation there are Five

(5) Combination of Variables (5C4= 5) and in Five variable Predictor Equation there is

One (1) Combination of Predictor Equation (5C5= 1).

338

Altogether there are Thirty one (31) Combination of equations in Five Predictor

Equation groups and from each such group of variables the Best Fit Predictor Equation is

selected.

The selection of the Best Fit Predictor equation is based on the combination of

Independent Variables on the Dependent Variable having highest co-efficient of

correlation and lower error estimates. Hence, there are Five (5) groups of combinations

of variables each and from each group that combination with the highest Multiple

Correlation (R) and Correlation Square (R2) is selected. The general predictor equation

based upon independent variable is:

= 0+ 2v2+ v3+ β4v4+ β5v5+ β6v6 +є Where, =Level of job satisfaction

of employees before and after corporatisation of DOT (Dependent Variable); β0 =

Constant,

β0+ β2v2+ β3v3+ β4v4+ β5v5+ β6v6 are the respective dependent variables; Beta Co-

efficient (β); and є = Error of the Estimate

One Variable, Two Variable, Three Variable, Four Variable and Five Variables

are explained below under each head:

1. One Variable Predictor Equation

In one variable predictor equation there are Five (5) combination of equations for

each set. The Correlation (R) and Correlation square (R2) of each such combinations is

stated in Table 4.23 and 4.24 respectively of Pre and post corporatisation. All the

correlation of the various equations is statistically significant when compared with table

values.

339

Table 4.23

One variable Predictor Equations (Pre-Corporatisation)

Variables Predictor Equations R R2

V2 = 43.94 + 0.21V2 + 2.51 0.33 0.11

V3 = 26.27 + 0.53V3 + 1.80 0.74 0.54

V4 = 46.53 + 0.15V4 + 2.42 0.42 0.18

V5 = 46.94 + 0.15V5 + 2.42 0.42 0.18

V6 = 50.27 + 0.09V6 + 2.47 0.38 0.14

Source: SPSS Out Put of Primary Data

Table 4.24

One variable Predictor Equations (Post-Corporatisation)


V2 = 48.45 + 0.21V2 + 2.27 0.39 0.14

V3 = 29.55 + 0.52V3 + 1.72 0.71 0.51

V4 = 48.55 + 0.19V4 + 2.14 0.48 0.24

V5 = 50.61 + 0.17V5 + 2.17 0.47 0.22

V6 = 53.95 + 0.11V6 + 2.29 0.36 0.13


Table 4.23 and 4.24 reveal that the best fit one variable predictor equation, in

connection with independent variable, is People Dimension (V3) both in pre and post-

corporatistion era, since it has the highest correlation of 0.74 and correlation square of

0.54 in the pre-corporatisation and 0.71 and 0.51 in the post-corporatisation with the

dependent variable the level of job satisfaction of employees before and after

340

corporatisation of DOT (V7) among all other combinations. The Best fit equations with

the independent variable superior Relationship 'V7' is

= β0+ β3V3+є

After the calculation of the constant, the Beta co-efficient of the variable V3 and

the standard Error, the best fit one variable predictor equations in pre and post

corporatisation is

= 26.27 + 0.53V3 + 1.80 and = 29.55 + 0.52V3 + 1.72

2. Two Variable Predictor Equation

In the two variable predictor equation, there are Ten (10) combinations of

independent variable with dependent variables. The Correlation(R) and Correlation

square (R2) each of such combinations is given in Table 4.25 and 4.26 respectively of pre

and post corporatisation.

Table 4.25

Two variable Predictor Equations (Pre-Corporatisation) Variables Predictor Equations R R2

V2, V3 = 14.11 + 0.22V2 + 0.53V3 + 1.54 0.82 0.67

V2, V4 = 35.98 + 0.20V2 + 0.15V4 + 2.27 0.53 0.28

V2, V5 = 34.11 + 0.23V2 + 0.16V5 + 2.22 0.55 0.31

V2, V6 = 38.34 + 0.22V2 + 0.09V6 + 2.29 0.51 0.26

V3, V4 = 21.51 + 0.50V3 + 0.11V4 + 1.59 0.80 0.64

V3, V5 = 20.65 + 0.51V3 + 0.13V5 + 1.54 0.82 0.67

V3, V6 = 24.31 + 0.50V3 + 0.06V6 + 1.65 0.79 0.62

V4, V5 = 38.16 + 0.15V4 + 0.15V5 + 2.14 0.60 0.35

V4, V6 = 40.84 + 0.16V4 + 0.10V6 + 2.17 0.58 0.34

V5, V6 = 42.73 + 0.14V5 + 0.08V6 + 2.23 0.55 0.30


341

Table 4.26

Two variable Predictor Equations (Post-Corporatisation) Variables Predictor Equations R R2

V2, V3 = 14.53 + 0.23V2 + 0.54V3 + 1.38 0.83 0.68

V2, V4 = 37.92 + 0.19V2 + 0.18V4 + 1.98 0.59 0.35

V2, V5 = 37.43 + 0.22V2 + 0.17V5 + 1.95 0.61 0.37

V2, V6 = 39.01 + 0.23V2 + 0.13V6 + 2.04 0.55 0.30

V3, V4 = 22.31 + 0.48V3 + 0.15V4 + 1.45 0.81 0.65

V3, V5 = 23.21 + 0.49V3 + 0.14V5 + 1.45 0.81 0.65

V3, V6 = 27.80 + 0.49V3 + 0.06V6 + 1.66 0.74 0.54

V4, V5 = 39.61 + 0.18V4 + 0.16V5 + 1.86 0.65 0.42

V4, V6 = 43.47 + 0.18V4 + 0.09V6 + 2.01 0.57 0.33

V5, V6 = 43.71 + 0.17V5 + 0.11V6 + 1.99 0.59 0.34


The Table 4.25 and 4.26 reveal that the best fit two variable predictor equation is

the combination of the variable in connection with Organisational Dimension (V2) and

People Dimension (V3) since it has the highest Correlation and Correlation square i.e.,

0.82 and 0.67 in the pre-corporatisation and 0.83 and 0.68 respectively of pre and post

corporatisation with the dependent variable level of job satisfaction of employees

before and after corporatisation (V7). The best fit equation is

= β0+ β2V2+β3V3+є

After the calculation of the constant, the beta co-efficient of the variable V2 and

V3 and the standard error, the best fit two variable predictor equation in both pre and

post corporatisation is = 14.11 + 0.22V2 + 0.53V3 + 1.54 and = 14.53 + 0.23V2 + 0.54V3 + 1.38

342

3. Three Variable Predictor Equation

In the Three variable predictor equation, there are Ten (10) combinations of

independent variable with dependent variables. The Correlation(R) and Correlation

square (R2) each of such combinations is given in Table 4.27 and 4.28 respectively of pre

and post corporatisation.

Table 4.27 Three variable Predictor Equations (Pre-Corporatisation)


V2, V3, V4 = 9.95 + 0.21V2 + 0.50V3 + 0.11V4 + 1.32 0.87 0.76

V2, V3, V5 = 7.20 + 0.23V2 + 0.51V3 + 0.14V5 + 1.18 0.90 0.81

V2, V3, V6 = 11.73 + 0.22V2 + 0.51V3 + 0.07V6 + 1.35 0.86 0.75

V2, V4, V5 = 26.08 + 0.22V2 + 0.15V4 + 0.16V5 + 1.94 0.69 0.48

V2, V4, V6 = 29.63 + 0.21V2 + 0.15V4 + 0.10V6 + 1.99 0.67 0.45

V2, V5, V6 = 29.32 + 0.23V2 + 0.15V5 + 0.09V6 + 2.00 0.66 0.44

V3, V4, V5 = 15.67 + 0.47V3 + 0.12V4 + 0.13V5 + 1.28 0.88 0.77

V3, V4, V6 = 19.01 + 0.46V3 + 0.12V4 + 0.07V6 + 1.39 0.85 0.73

V3, V5, V6 = 19.00 + 0.48V3 + 0.12V5 + 0.06V6 + 1.39 0.86 0.73

V4, V5, V6 = 33.24 + 0.16V4 + 0.14V5 + 0.09V6 + 1.90 0.70 0.50


343

Table 4.28

Three variable Predictor Equations (Post-Corporatisation)


V2, V3, V4 = 9.06 + 0.22V2 + 0.50V3 + 0.14V4 + 1.10 0.89 0.80

V2, V3, V5 = 7.80 + 0.24V2 + 0.51V3 + 0.14V5 + 1.01 0.91 0.83

V2, V3, V6 = 11.54 + 0.25V2 + 0.50V3 + 0.08V6 + 1.26 0.86 0.74

V2, V4, V5 = 28.30 + 0.20V2 + 0.17V4 + 0.16V5 + 1.65 0.71 0.55

V2, V4, V6 = 30.73 + 0.21V2 + 0.16V4 + 0.11V6 + 1.79 0.69 0.47

V2, V5, V6 = 28.10 + 0.24V2 + 0.17V5 + 0.12V6 + 1.68 0.73 0.53

V3, V4, V5 = 16.60 + 0.45V3 + 0.15V4 + 0.13V5 + 1.15 0.88 0.78

V3, V4, V6 = 21.09 + 0.45V3 + 0.15V4 + 0.05V6 + 1.40 0.83 0.68

V3, V5, V6 = 21.30 + 0.45V3 + 0.14V5 + 0.06V6 + 1.37 0.83 0.69

V4, V5, V6 = 34.53 + 0.17V4 + 0.16V5 + 0.09V6 + 1.71 0.72 0.52


The Table 4.27 and 4.28 reveal that the best fit three variable predictor equation is

the combination of the variable in connection with Organisational Dimension (V2),

People Dimension (V3) and Planning and Management Dimension (V5) since it has the

highest Correlation and Correlation Square is 0.90 and 0.81 and 0.91 and 0.83

respectively of pre and post corporatisation with the dependent variable level of job

satisfaction of employees before and after corporatisation (V7). The best fit equation is

7 = β0+ β2V2+β3V3+ β5V5є

After the calculation of the constant, the beta co-efficient of the variable V2 , V3

and V5 and the standard error, the best fit two variable predictor equation both in pre

and post corporatisation is = 7.20 + 0.23V2 + 0.51V3+ 0.14V5 + 1.18 and

=7.80+ 0.24V2+ 0.51V3+0.14V5 + 1.01

344

4. Four Variable Predictor Equation

In this variable Predictor Equation, there are Five (5) combinations of

independent variables. The Correlation (R) and Correlation Square (R2) of each such

combination are given in Tables 4.29 and 4.30 respectively of pre and post

corporatisation.

Table 4.29

Four Variable Predictor Equations (Pre-Corporatisation)


V2, V3, V4, V5 = 2.84 + 0.23V2 + 0.48V3 + 0.11V4 + 0.14V5 + 0.84 0.95 0.90

V2, V3, V4, V6 = 7.03 + 0.22V2 + 0.47V3 + 0.12V4 + 0.07V6 + 1.04 0.92 0.85

V2, V3, V5, V6 = 5.16 + 0.24V2 + 0.48V3 + 0.13V5 + 0.06V6 + 0.94 0.94 0.88

V2, V4, V5, V6 = 20.59 + 0.22V2 + 0.15V4 + 0.15V5 + 0.09V6 + 1.64 0.79 0.62

V3, V4, V5, V6 = 13.51 + 0.44V3 + 0.12V4 + 0.12V5 + 0.07V6 + 1.04 0.92 0.85


Table 4.30 Four Variable Predictor Equations (Post-Corporatisation)


V2, V3, V4, V5 = 2.90 + 0.22V2 + 0.47V3 + 0.13V4 + 0.14V5 + 0.62 0.97 0.94

V2, V3, V4, V6 = 6.75 + 0.23V2 + 0.47V3 + 0.13V4 + 0.07V6 + 0.98 0.92 0.84

V2, V3, V5, V6 = 4.56 + 0.25V2 + 0.46V3 + 0.14V5 + 0.08V6 + 0.81 0.94 0.89

V2, V4, V5, V6 = 21.05 + 0.22V2 + 0.15V4 + 0.16V5 + 0.11V6 + 1.41 0.82 0.67

V3, V4, V5, V6 = 15.23 + 0.42V3 + 0.14V4 + 0.13V5 + 0.05V6 + 1.08 0.90 0.81


The Table 4.29 and Table 4.30 reveal that the best fit Four variable predictor

equation is the combination Organisational Dimension (V2), People Dimension (V3),

Technological Dimension (V4) and Planning and Management Dimension (V5) since it

has the highest Correlation 0.95 and Correlation square is 0.90 and 0.97 and 94

345

respectively of pre and post corporatisation with the dependent variable level of job

satisfaction of employees on corporatisation (V7). The best fit equation is

=β0+ β2V2+β3V3+ β4V4+ β5V5+є.

After the calculation of constant, the beta co-efficient of variables and standard

error, the best fit from variable predictor equation is

= 2.84+0.23V2+ 0.48V3+0.11V4+0.14V5+0.84 and

= 2.90 + 0.22V2 + 0.47V3 + 0.13V4 + 0.14V5 + 0.62

5. Five Variable Predictor Equation

In this variable Predictor Equation, there is One (1) combination of independent

variables. The Correlation (R) and Correlation Square ( R2) of each such combination are

given in Table 4.31 and 4.32 respectively of pre and post corporatisation.

Table 4.31

Five variable Predictor Equation (Pre-Corporatisation)


V2, V3, V4, V5, V6 =0.30+0.23V2 +0.44V3 +0.12V4 + 0.13V5 + 0.07V6 + 0.33 0.99 0.99


Table 4.32 Five variable Predictor Equation


V2, V3, V4, V5, V6 = 0.35 + 0.23V2 + 0.43V3 + 0.12V4 + 0.14V5 + 0.07V6 + 0.33 0.99 0.98


It reveals that the best fit Five variable predictor equation is the combination of

Organisational Dimension (V2), People Dimension (V3), Technological Dimension (V4),

Planning and Management Dimension (V5) and Operational Dimension (V6) since it has

the highest Correlation value of 0.99 and Correlation square of 0.99 in both the cases

346

with the dependent variable Level of job satisfaction of employees during pre and post

corporatisation of DOT ). The best fit equation with the independent variables is

= β0+ β2V2+β3V3+β4V4+ β5 V5+ β6 V6+є

After the calculation of constant, the beta co-efficient of variables and standard error,

the best fit from variable predictor equation is

= 0.30 + 0.23V2 + 0.44V3 + 0.12V4 + 0.13V5 + 0.07V6 + 0.33; and

= 0.35 + 0.23V2 + 0.43V3 + 0.12V4 + 0.14V5 + 0.07V6 + 0.33

The selected Seven Predictor Equation is shown in Table 4.33 and Table 4.34

Table 4.33 Regression Model of Predictor Equations on the level of satisfaction of Employees

during the pre-corporatisation period Variables Predictor Equations R R2

V3 = 26.27 + 0.53V3 + 1.80 0.74 0.54

V2, V3 = 14.11 + 0.22V2 + 0.53V3 + 1.54 0.82 0.67

V2, V3, V5 = 7.20 + 0.23V2 + 0.51V3 + 0.14V5 + 1.18 0.90 0.81

V2, V3, V4, V5 = 2.84 + 0.23V2 + 0.48V3 + 0.11V4 + 0.14V5 + 0.84 0.95 0.90

V2, V3, V4, V5, V6 = 0.30 + 0.23V2 + 0.44V3 + 0.12V4 + 0.13V5 + 0.07V6 + 0.33

0.99 0.99


Table 4.34 Regression Model of Predictor Equations on the level of satisfaction of Employees

during the post-corporatisation period


V3 = 29.55 + 0.52V3 + 1.72 0.71 0.51

V2, V3 = 14.53 + 0.23V2 + 0.54V3 + 1.38 0.83 0.68

V2, V3, V5 = 7.80 + 0.24V2 + 0.51V3 + 0.14V5 + 1.01 0.91 0.83

V2, V3, V4, V5 = 2.90 + 0.22V2 + 0.47V3 + 0.13V4 + 0.14V5 + 0.62 0.97 0.94

V2, V3, V4, V5, V6 = 0.35 + 0.23V2 + 0.43V3 + 0.12V4 + 0.14V5 + 0.07V6 + 0.33

0.99 0.98


347

The Variables identified and analysed are Organisational Dimension (V2), People

Dimension (V3), Technological Dimension (V4), Planning and Management

Dimension(V5) and Operational Dimension (V6). The mean score, standard deviation and

co-efficient of variation is ascertained based on their opinion at different levels to know

the significance of the variables. It is made clear that all these variables are significant.

The existence of these variables is analysed and compared with the help of individual

mean score of opinion level of all the sub-variables fall under Five heads. It is seen

significant based on the mean score. The regression analysis is made to know the

relationship of the independent variables such as Organisation level, Peoples level,

Technology level, Planning and Management aspect and Operational level and the

dependent variable Level of job satisfaction of employees during the pre and post

corporatisation periods. It is analysed through One variable, Two variable, Three

variable, Four variable and Five variable predictor equations (Regression Model). It is

seen proved from the regression model that the major factors such as Organisation,

People, Technology, Planning and Management and the Operational ones are very

significant in increasing the level of job satisfaction of the employees in both pre and

post corporatisation eras.

not the same during the pre and post corporatization periods stands rejected.

Based on this finding the researcher further examines the improvement in

satisfaction level if any after the corporatization period. For that, the summary mean

scores on main variables before and after corporatization are illustrated in Table 4.35 to

Table 4.39.

Hence, the null hypothesis that the major job satisfaction variables of employees are

348

Table 4. 35

Organisational Dimension Score of Employees

Code Sub-variables

Average Score Pre corporatisation

Post corporatisation

Change

V2.1 Number of layers in the organization 46 53 +7

V2.2 Degree of centralization 32 35 +3

V2.3 Emphasis on structure and procedure (formality) 58 63 +5

V2.4 Extent of entrepreneurship in the organization 41 50 +9

V2.5 Strength of company’s market research system 65 71 +6

V2.6 Company’s customer performance feedback system 35 44 +9

V2.7 Company’s competitor intelligence system 71 74 +3

V2.8 Company’s linkage with suppliers 38 42 +4

V2.9 Company’s linkage with customers 54 61 +7

V2.10 Adequacy of resources 57 63 +6

V2.11 Reputation of the company 60 75 +15

V2.12 Physical work environment 55 60 +5

V2.13 Cross-department relations 50 60 +10

V2.14 Communication between units 57 60 +3

V2.15 Gender balancing 55 57 +2

V2.16 Loyalty to the organization 59 62 +3

V2.17 Quality of organizations 68 70 +2

V2.18 Fairness of organization 75 80 +5

V2.19 Proud on organization 61 62 +1

V2.20 Organisational Dynamism 54 54 0 Source: Computed from Table 4.5 to 4.8

349

Table 4. 36

People Dimension Score of Employees

Code Sub-variables

Average Score pre corporatisation


Change

V3.1 Employee involvement in design 56 60 +4

V3.2 Employee involvement in planning

66 69 +3

V3.3 Employee education

46 46 0

V3.4 Employee training 66 67 +1

V3.5 Employee well being 54 55 +1

V3.6 Employee morale 51 57 +6

V3.7 Employees’ interaction with subscribers 54 65 +11

V3.8 Employees’ interaction with suppliers 54 61 +7

V3.9 Active suggestion system 41 45 +4

V3.10 Employee autonomy 57 62 +5

V3.11 Support for professional activities 57 65 +8

V3.12 Hiring practices in the unit 55 62 +7

V3.13 Clarity of performance criteria 64 71 +7

V3.14 Fairness of workload distribution 60 68 +8

V3.15 Promotion opportunity 51 54 +3

V3.16 Fairness of hiring external candidates 58 62 +4

V3.17 Recognition for employees’ contributions 61 67 +6

V3.18 Recognition for employees’ expertise 63 68 +5

350

V3.19 Guidance from employees’ supervisor. 58 65 +7

V3.20 Feedback on employees’ performance 53 58 +5

V3.21 Authority to make employees’ decisions 41 45 +4

V3.22 Availability of Mentoring 65 70 +5

V3.23 Relationship with senior administrators 59 65 +6

V3.24 Leadership in employees’ unit 40 44 +4

V3.25 Pressure feeling to perform 32 34 +2

V3.26 Degree of freedom 65 69 +4

V3.27 Preference for job to salary 65 70 +5

V3.28 Degree of trust and confidence 51 56 +5

V3.29 Comfort with the operator 55 59 +4

V3.30 Satisfaction with salary 50 55 +5

V3.31 Company benefits and retirement plans 43 47 +4

V3.32 Relationship with colleagues 59 64 +5

V3.33 Sense of team work 51 60 +9

V3.34 Supervisor keeps employee informed 59 66 +7

V3.35 Severity of Staff turnover 37 40 +3

V3.36 Performance effectiveness 69 75 +6

V3.37 Satisfaction with work and responsibilities 64 71 +7 Source: Computed from Table 4.9 to 4.16

351

Table 4. 37

Technological Dimension Score of Employees

Code Sub-variables



Change

V4.1 Process used by the firm 59 66 +7

V4.2 Research and development intensity 69 77 +8

V4.3 Innovation programmes 56 65 +9

V4.4 Low cost technology 64 75 +11

V4.5 Adaptability 64 69 +5

V4.6 Compatibility 48 52 +4

V4.7 Specialisation in job 50 55 +5

V4.8 Enjoyment in working 54 60 +6

V4.9 Reliability on subscribers’ interests 54 61 +7

V4.10 Professional competence 63 70 +7 Source: Computed from Table 4.17 to 4.18

352

Table 4.38

Planning and Management Dimension Score of Employees

Code Sub-variables



Change

V5.1 Long term objectives 61 65 +4

V5.2 Action Plans 58 65 +7

V5.3 Short term objectives 62 69 +7

V5.4 External environmental sensitivity 62 69 +7

V5.5 Planning flexibility 45 51 +6

V5.6 Quantum of employees’ input in decision making 65 72 +7

V5.7 Pay parity 59 66 +7

V5.8 Working relationship 51 61 +10

V5.9 Sense of common purpose 45 51 +6

V5.10 Caring 33 40 +7

V5.11 Transparency in pricing policies 65 70 +5 Source: Computed from Table 4.19 to 4.20

353

Table 4. 39

Operational Dimension Score of Employees

Code Sub-variables

Average Score

Pre corpora-tisation


Change

V6.1 Profit growth 65 58 -7

V6.2 Sales revenue 62 70 +8V6.3 Financial strength 54 61 +7 V6.4 Operating efficiency 55 68 +13

V6.5 Performance stability 57 69 +12

V6.6 Employee morale 45 49 +4 Source: Computed from Table 4.21 to 4.22

As far as the Organisational Dimension is concerned, the mean level of opinion of all the

sub-variables except Organisational Dynamism show increase in the post-corporatisation

period. The sub-variables viz., Reputation of the company (15 per cent), Cross-department

relations (10 per cent) and Company’s customer performance feedback system (9 per cent)

possess the highest rate of increase in the post-corporatisation period.

As far as the People Dimension is concerned, the mean level of opinion of all the

other sub-variables except Employee education show increase in the post-corporatisation

period. The sub-variables Employees’ interaction with customers (11 per cent) and Sense of

team work (9 per cent) possess high rate of increase in the post-corporatisation period.

As far as the Technological Dimension is concerned, the mean level of opinion of

all the sub-variables in the Technological Dimension show increase in the post-

corporatisation period. The sub-variables viz., Research and development intensity (8 per

354

cent), Low cost technology (9 per cent) and Innovation programmes (11 per cent) possess high

rate of increases in the post-corporatisation period.

As far as the Planning and Management Dimension is concerned, the mean level

of opinion of all the sub-variables show increase in the post-corporatisation period. The

sub-variable viz., Working relationship possess the highest rate of increase (10 per cent)

in the post-corporatisation period. The sub-variable Long term objectives has the lowest

increase (4 per cent) in the mean level of opinion in the post-corporatisation period.

As far as the Operational Dimension is concerned, there is a negative change (7 per

cent) in the mean level of opinion on the sub-variable Profit growth. The mean level of

opinion of all the other sub-variables in it show increase in the post-corporatisation

period. The sub-variables viz., Operating efficiency and Performance stability possess high

rate of increase (13 per cent and 12 per cent respectively) in the post-corporatisation

period.

Based on these analyses it is evident that corporatization has increased the job

satisfaction level of employees as 81 sub-variables out of 84 reported an increased mean

score. To see whether it is statistically significant or not the researcher further attempts

to test the null hypothesis formulated that:

H04: There is no significant difference in Employees’ job satisfaction during pre

and post corporatisation of DOT

The employees’ job satisfaction before and after the corporatization of DOT has

been subjected to the statistical test as to whether there is any significant difference in

their levels. The null hypothesis laid down was that ‘there is no significant difference

355

between the employees’ job satisfaction during pre and post corporatisation of DOT’.

Thus it is assumed that the mean satisfaction level of employees during these two periods

is one and the same. When test is conducted, if it is found that the computed value of test

statistic falls in rejection region, i.e., the mean of these two sets (pre and post

corporatisation) are not equal, the null hypothesis (H0) is rejected and the alternative

hypothesis (H1) is accepted.

The mean employees’ job satisfaction in respect of periods before and after the

corporatisation of DOT is shown in table 4.40.

Table 4.40

Group Statistics on Employees’ Job Satisfaction before and after Corporatisation of DOT

Source: SPSS output on analysis of Primary Data

To test the hypothesis, the Independent Sample test is administered. The test is

conducted in two stages, first Levene’s test for Equality of variance before and after

corporatisation and then t – test for equality of means of satisfaction before and after

corporatisation. The table contains two sets of analysis, the first one assuming equal

variances in the two groups and the second one assuming unequal variances. The

Levene’s test throws light on which statistics to consider analyzing the equality of means.

It tests the null hypothesis that the two groups have equal variances. A small value of

significance associated with Levene’s test indicates that the two groups have equal

variance and the null hypothesis is true. Here in this case, a considerable value of this

375 55.21 2.659 .137375 60.98 2.444 .126

PeriodPre CorporatisationPost Corporatisation

V7N Mean Std. Deviation

Std. ErrorMean

356

test statistic indicates that the employees’ satisfaction level during these two periods, viz.,

before and after corporatisation of DOT, do have equal variances.

Therefore, the statistic associated with equal variance assumed should be used for

the t – test for equality of means.

Table 4.41

Independent Sample Test on Job Satisfaction level of Employees before and after Corporatisation

Source: SPSS output on analysis of Primary Data

The test result in the above table (Table 4.41) shows the t statistic of – 30.928

with 748 degree of freedom. The corresponding two – tailed p – value is 0.000 which is

less than 0.05 and 0.01. Therefore, we can reject the null hypothesis both at 5 per cent

and one per cent level of significance, which means that the average employees’

satisfaction during the pre and post corporatisation periods are significantly different

from each other i.e., the employees’ satisfaction is more during the post corporatization

period.

Independent Samples Test

.923 .337 -30.928 748 .000 -5.768 .186

-30.928 742.74 .000 -5.768 .186

EqualvariancesassumedEqualvariances notassumed

V7F Sig.

Levene's Test forEquality ofVariances

t dfSig.

(2-tailed)Mean

DifferenceStd. ErrorDifference

t-test for Equality of Means

Documents

CHAPTER IV EMPLOYEES’ JOB SATISFACTION - AN ANALYSIS …shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/18153/10/10_chapter4.pdf · CHAPTER IV EMPLOYEES’ JOB SATISFACTION - AN ANALYSIS