CHAPTER- V

ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF NEYCER INDIA LIMITED:
The data, after collection, has to be processed and analyzed in
accordance with the outline laid down for the purpose at the time of
developing the research plan. This is essential for a scientific study for
ensuring that we have all relevant data for making contemplated
comparisons and analysis.
The term analysis refers to the consumption of certain measures
along with searching for patterns of relationship that exist among data
groups. Analysis of a data in a general way involves a number of closely
related

operations,

which

are

performed

with

the

purpose

of

summarizing the collected data and organizing these in a manner that

they answer the research question.
The following tools are used for analysis of data.
1.

Percentage method

2.

Anova

3.

t- test and

4.

Chi-Square

Table-4.1
Distribution of Respondents by their Age
Age

No. of
Respondents

Percentage

Below 35 yrs

15

15.00

36-45 yrs

57

57.00

46-50 yrs

28

28.00

Total

100

100.00

Inference:
It is inferred that 15% of the respondents belong to the age group
of below 35 years , 57% of the respondents are under the age group of
36-45 years and 28% of the respondents belong to the age group of above
46 years. So majority of the respondents are 36-45 years age groups.

Distribution of Respondents by their Age

57

60

50

Percentage

40
28

30

Below 35 yrs
36-45 yrs
46-50 yrs

20

15

10

0
Below 35 yrs

36-45 yrs

46-50 yrs

Age

Table-4.2
Distribution of the Respondents by their Gender
Gender

No. of
Respondents

Percentage

Male

78

78.00

Female

22

22.00

Total

100

100.00

Inference:
From the table it is inferred that 99% of the respondents have male
and the remaining 1% of the respondents have female. So majority of the
respondents are male respondents.

Distribution of the Respondents on the basis gender

22
78

Male
Female

Table-4.3
Distribution of the Respondents by their Qualification
No. of
Respondents

Percentage

Below SSLC

25

25.00

H.Sc

60

60.00

Degree

9.00

Diploma

6.00

100

100.00

Qualification

Total
Inference:

From the table it is inferred that 25% of the respondents are from
Below SSLC, 60% of the respondents are from H.Sc course, 9% of the
respondents are degree and the remaining 6% of the respondents are
diploma. So majority of the respondents are higher secondary level
qualification.

Chart-4.3

Distribution of Respondents by their Qualification

60
60

50

Percentage

40
Below SSLC
30

H.Sc

25

Degree
Diploma

20
9
10

0
Below SSLC

H.Sc

Degree

Qualification

Diploma

Table-4.4
Distribution of the Respondents by their Income
No. of
Respondents

Percentage

Less than 5000

10

10.00

5001-10000

41

41.00

10001-20000

35

35.00

20000 above

14

14.00

100

100.00

Income

Total
Inference:

From the table it is inferred that 10% of the respondents are from
Less than 5000 income, 41% of the respondents are from Rs.500110000, 9% of the respondents are Rs.10001-20000 and the remaining
14% of the respondents are 20000 above. So majority of the respondents
are 5001-10000 income.

Distribution of Respondents by their Income

45

41

40

35

35

Percentage

30
Less than 5000

25

5001-10000

20
15

14
10

20000 above

10
5
0
Less than
5000

10001-20000

5001-10000

10001-20000

Income

20000 above

Table-4.5
Distribution of the respondents on the basis of marital status
Marital Status

No. of
Respondents

Percentage

Married

89

89.00

Unmarried

11

11.00

Total

100

100.00

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 89% of the respondents are
married group and 11% of the respondents unmarried groups.
majority of the respondents are married groups.

So

Chart 4.4

Distribution of the respondents on the basis of marital status

11

Married
Unmarried

89

10

Table-4.6
Distribution of the respondents on the basis of Nature of Family
Setup
Nature of
family setup

No. of
Respondents

Percentage

Nuclear family

23

23.00

Joint family

77

77.00

Total

100

100.00

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 23% of the respondents are
Nature of family setup group and 77% of the respondents unmarried
groups. So majority of the respondents are married groups.

11

Distribution of the respondents on the basis of Nature of family setup

23

Nuclear family
Joint family

77

12

Table-4.7
Distribution of the Respondents by their Experience
Experience

No. of
Percentage
Respondents

Less than 7 years

30

30.00

8 years above- 15 years

52

52.00

15 years above

18

18.00

100

100.00

Total
Inference:

From the table it is inferred that 30% of the respondents are less
than 7years experience, 52% of the respondents are from 8 years above15 years and 18% of the respondents are 15 years above experience.

13

Distribution of Respondents by their Experience

60
52
50

Percentage

40
30

Less than 7 years

30

8 years above- 15 years

18

20

10

0
Less than 7 years

8 years above15 years

15 years above

Experience

14

15 years above

Table-4.8
Distribution of the respondents on the basis of Nature of Family
Setup
Living the
Place

No. of
Respondents

Percentage

Village

62

62.00

Town

38

38.00

Total

100

100.00

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 62% of the respondents are
living the place and 38% of the respondents are Town.
Distribution of the respondents on the basis of marital status

38

Village
Town
62

15

Table-4.1
Showing Mean, SD and ANOVA value for employee conflict on the
basis of Age
Age

Mean

SD

Below 35 yrs

15

78.93

9.00

36-45 yrs

57

82.25

9.43

46-50 yrs

28

79.64

6.73

Total

100

81.02

8.72

F- Value

P- Value

1.350

0.26 (NS)

Inference:
Hy: Employees do not differ in their opinion about employees conflict on
the basis of age.
The table shows that all the group of employees scored equal mean
values. The calculated F ratio (1.350) is not significant. So the stated
hypothesis is accepted. Therefore Employees do not differ in their opinion
about employees conflict on the basis of age.

16

Table-4.2
Showing Mean, SD and t- value for employee conflict on the basis of
gender
Gender

Mean

SD

Male

99

81.05

8.76

Female

78.00

0.00

t- Value

P- Value

0.346

0.730
(NS)

Inference:
Hy: Employees do not differ in their opinion about employees conflict on
the basis of gender.
The table shows that all the group of employees scored equal mean
values. The calculated t ratio (0.346) is not significant. So the stated
hypothesis is accepted. Therefore Employees do not differ in their opinion
about employees conflict on the basis of gender.

17

Table-4.3
Showing Mean, SD and ANOVA value for employee conflict on the
basis of qualification
Qualification

Mean

SD

Below SSLC

25

80.84

8.38

H.Sc

60

81.53

9.21

Degree

80.56

8.78

Diploma

77.33

5.05

100

81.02

8.72

Total

F- Value

P- Value

0.431

0.731
(NS)

Hy: Employees do not differ in their opinion about employees conflict on

the basis of Qualification.
The table shows that all the group of employees scored equal mean
values. The calculated F ratio (0.431) is not significant. So the stated
hypothesis is accepted. Therefore Employees do not differ in their opinion
about employees conflict on the basis of Qualification.

18

Table-4.4
Showing Mean, SD and ANOVA value for employee conflict on the
basis of Income
N

Mean

SD

Less than 5000

10

80.30

9.20

5001-10000

41

80.73

9.21

10001-20000

35

82.23

8.79

20000 above

14

79.36

7.08

100

81.02

8.72

Income

Total

F- Value

P- Value

0.423

0.737

Hy: Employees do not differ in their opinion about employees conflict on

the basis of Qualification.
The table shows that all the group of employees scored equal mean
values. The calculated F ratio (0.423) is not significant. So the stated
hypothesis is accepted. Therefore Employees do not differ in their opinion
about employees conflict on the basis of Qualification.

19

Table-4.5
Distribution of the respondents on the basis of marital status
Marital Status

Mean

SD

t- Value

P- Value

Married

89

81.16

8.73

0.446

Unmarried

11

79.91

8.98

0.670
(NS)

Hy: Employees do not differ in their opinion about employees conflict on

the basis of Marital status.
The table shows that all the group of employees scored equal mean
values. The calculated t ratio (0.446) is not significant. So the stated
hypothesis is accepted. Therefore Employees do not differ in their opinion
about employees conflict on the basis of marital status.

20

Table-4.6
Distribution of the respondents on the basis of Nature of Family
Setup
Nature of
Family Setup

Mean

SD

Nuclear
family

23

79.96

9.79

Joint family

77

81.34

8.43

t- Value

P- Value

0.612

0.508
(NS)

Hy: Employees do not differ in their opinion about employees conflict on

the basis of Family setup.
The table shows that all the group of employees scored equal mean
values. The calculated t ratio (0.612) is not significant. So the stated
hypothesis is accepted. Therefore Employees do not differ in their opinion
about employees conflict on the basis of family setup.

21

Table-4.7
Distribution of the Respondents by their Experience
Experience

Mean

SD

F- Value

P- Value

Less than 7 years

30

80.37

9.01

1.59

0.209

8 years above- 15
years

52

82.35

9.00

15 years above

18

78.28

6.91

100

81.02

8.72

Total

Hy: Employees do not differ in their opinion about employees conflict on

the basis of Experience.
The table shows that all the group of employees scored equal mean
values. The calculated F value (1.59) is not significant. So the stated
hypothesis is accepted. Therefore Employees do not differ in their opinion
about employees conflict on the basis of experience.

22

Table-4.8
Distribution of the respondents on the basis of Nature of Family
Setup
Living the
Place

Mean

Village

62

81.79 8.75

Town

38

79.76 8.66

SD

t- Value

P- Value

1.132

0.62 (NS)

Hy: Employees do not differ in their opinion about employees conflict on

the basis of Family setup.
The table shows that all the group of employees scored equal mean
values. The calculated t Value (1.132) is not significant. So the stated
hypothesis is accepted. Therefore Employees do not differ in their opinion
about employees conflict on the basis of family setup.

23

24